UC-NRLF 


MD    MD2 


OGRESS 


J.F.WILBER 


JESSICA  B.  PtIXOTTO 


GIFT   OF 


PROGRESS 

AND    ITS    ENEMIES 

SHOWING  THE  FALLACY  OF  THE  SINGLE- 
TAX  THEORY,  AND  SOME  OTHER 
ENEMIES  OF  PROGRESS 

BY 

JOHN  FREMONT  WILBER 


How  many  times  shall  I  adjure  thee  that  thou  speak 
unto  me  nothing  but  the  truth  in  the  name  of  Jehovah. 

II  Chronicles  xvii,  15 


PUBLISHED    BY 

JOHN  FREMONT  WILBER, 

SOMERVILLE,    MASS.,     U.    S.    A., 

1918. 


COPYRIGHTED    BY 

JOHN  FREMONT  WILBER, 

1918. 


DEDICATED  TO  THE  ONE  WHO 
WILL  TAKE  THE  MOST  INTEREST 
IN  ITS  SUCCESS  OR  ITS  FAILURE, 

MY  WIFE, 
ELIZABETH  J.  WILDER. 


388150 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter    I— A  Lie  Which  is  Part  a  truth.     .  1 

II — Personal  Enemies 6 

III— Natural  Enemies 10 

IV — Artificial  Enemies 13 

V— Back  to  the  Land 17 

VI— Is  It  a  Remedy 23 

VII— The  Proportional  Tax.    ...  30 

VIII— Danger  of  Untaxed  Voter.     .  36 

K— Bases  of  Taxation 45 

X— Effect  of  Taxes  on  Production.  51 

XI— Land 54 

XII— Labor 60 

XIII— Capital 66 

XIV— The  Functions  of  Capital.   .    .  75 

XV— Rent,  and  Its  Law 83 

XVI— Interest 87 

XVII— Wages 94 

XVIII— Conclusion 101 


PREFACE 

Becoming  convinced  that  the  single-tax  was  a 
fallacy,  I  sent  a  challenge  to  the  president  of  the 
Massachusetts  Single  Tax  League,  Inc.,  to  meet 
him  or  any  of  his  fraternity  in  joint  debate  on 
the  single-tax  theory. 

Although  the  president  of  that  society,  who 
is  a  college  professor,  had  been  giving  addresses 
in  at  least  a  dozen  different  places  in  Massachu- 
setts he  never  answered  the  challenge,  but  I  did 
receive  a  letter  from  the  secretary  of  the  Single 
Tax  League  inquiring  as  to  my  beliefs  and 
whether  I  stood  for  the  status  quo. 

It  is  not  my  idea  of  a  joint  debate  to  tell  my 
opponent  the  line  of  attack  or  defense  in  ad- 
vance, but  I  wrote  and  told  him  that,  while  I  was 
an  independent  thinker,  I  stood  for  the  status  quo 
in  preference  to  the  single  tax. 

I  received  from  the  secretary  the  following 
letter: 

MASSACHUSETTS  SINGLE  TAX  LEAGUE,  INC.,  ) 
BOSTON,  MASS,  April  30, 1917.     j 
Mr.  J.  F.  Wilber 

Dear  Sir — Thanks  for  your  letter.  I  think  we 
had  better  not  attempt  a  debate.  I  am  delighted 
to  thrash  out  the  pros  and  cons  of  the  single 
tax  with  any  one  who  condems  the  present  con- 
dition of  affairs  and  has  what  he  thinks  a  better 


ii  PREFACE 

scheme  to  propose,  whether  he  may  call  himself 
Socialist,  Anarchist,  or  by  any  other  name.  But 
if  you  stand  for  the  status  quo,  with  all  its  re- 
sults in  Rockefellers  and  Astors,  and  East  Side 
slums,  then  I  assure  you  no  member  of  this 
league  could  find  any  common  ground  with  you 
on  which  to  start  a  debate.  All  the  same  I 
shall  be  glad  to  see  you  if  you  can  call  some 
day.  Yours  truly,  ALEX.  MACKENDRICK. 

Debate,  according  to  Worcester,  is  "a  conten- 
tion of  argument;  a  disputation;  a  controversy; 
an  altercation ;  a  quarrel ;  a  contest." 

How  can  there  be  any  "contest,  or  strife,  or 
quarrel"  between  those  who  think  alike? 

The  single-taxer  believes  in  the  public  owner- 
ship of  the  land,  and  the  Socialist  believes  in  the 
public  ownership  of  the  land  (and  nearly  every- 
thing else),  how  then  could  there  be  any  dispute 
between  these,  or  either  of  them? 

What  they  would  have,  should  they  meet, 
would  be  a  "love-feast."  No  doubt  the  single- 
tax  secretary  and  president  would  both  be 
"delighted  to  thrash  out  the  pros  and  cons," 
chiefly  the  pros,  with  such  opponents,  especially 
if  they  could  camouflage  the  public  into  think- 
ing it  a  real  contest  and  thereby  gain  a  little 
notoriety. 

The  gentleman  "would  be  glad  to  see"  me 
"if"  I  "would  call." 

Who  ever  heard  of  a  duellist  making  an  after- 
noon "call"  on  his  enemy?  I  wonder  would  he 
serve  pink  tea? 

I  look  upon  the  single-taxers  as  men  who  ad- 


PREFACE  iii 

yocate  robbery  of  private  property  (by  the  pub- 
lic), like  the  Bolsheviki  of  Russia,  and  I  believe 
the  extermination  of  the  teachers  of  that  doc- 
trine would  be  a  blessing  to  mankind. 

The  only  reason  I  sent  a  challenge  to  debate 
was  because  the  other  kind  of  a  challenge  is  not 
permissible  under  our  laws,  and  I  try  to  be  a 
law-abiding  citizen. 

The  rattlesnake  sounds  a  warning  before  he 
strikes  and  thus  gives  an  opportunity  to  defend 
one's  self.  It  is  evident  the  single-taxers  prefer 
the  method  used  by  the  German  submarine  of 
striking  without  warning. 

Because  of  the  declination  of  the  beforemen- 
tioned  officers  of  the  Massachusetts  Single  Tax 
League,  Inc.,  to  meet  in  joint  debate,  I  decided 
to  put  some  of  my  thoughts  in  type,  hoping  and 
expecting  thereby  to  reach  more  people  than  I 
would  by  any  joint  debate. 

John  Fremont  Wilber. 


CHAPTER  I. 
A  LIE  WHICH  Is  PART  A  TRUTH. 

That  a  lie  which  is  half  a  truth  is  ever  the  blackest  of  lies ; 
That  a  lie  which  is  all  a  lie  may  be  met  and  fought  with  outright 
But  a  lie  which  is  part  a  truth  is  a  harder  matter  to  fight. 

Tennyson. 

If  there  were  no  "single  taxers"  this  thesis 
would  not  have  been  written.  A  "single  taxer" 
does  not  believe  in  private  ownership  of  land 
and  the  "single  tax"  is  a  scheme  to  abolish  such 
ownership.  Their  chief  writer  says:  "Histori- 
cally, as  ethically,  private  property  in  land  is 
robbery." 

The  "single  tax"  does  not  mean  simply  the 
avoidance  of  double  taxation,  but  it  means  the 
abolition  of  all  taxes  except  one,  and  that  one  to 
be  on  the  land,  or,  as  they  express  it,  "a  tax  on 
land  values,"  and  they  wish  to  increase  that  tax 
until  it  takes  the  full  value  of  the  land. 

It  has  been  said  that  in  a  progressive  civiliza- 
tion "the  rich  grow  richer  and  the  poor  grow 
poorer." 

"This  fact,"  says  Henry  George,  "the  fact  that 
poverty  and  all  its  concomitants  show  themselves 
in  a  community  just  as  they  develop  into  the 


PROGRESS 

condition  toward  which  material  progress  tends, 
prove  that  social  difficulties,  existing  wherever  a 
certain  stage  of  progress  has  been  reached,  do 
not  arise  from  local  circumstances,  but  are,  in 
some  way  or  another,  engendered  by  progress 
itself." 

"It  is  to  the  newer  countries — that  is  to  the 
countries  where  material  progress  is  yet  in  its 
earlier  stages — that  laborers  emigrate  in  search 
of  higher  wages,  and  capital  flows  in  search  of 
higher  interest.  It  is  in  the  older  countries— 
that  is  to  say,  the  countries  where  material  prog- 
ress has  reached  later  stages — that  widespread 
destitution  is  found  in  the  midst  of  the  greatest 
abundance.  Go  into  one  of  the  new  communi- 
ties where  Anglo-Saxon  vigor  is  just  beginning 
the  race  of  progress,  where  the  machinery  of 
production  and  exchange  is  yet  rude  and  ineffi- 
cient ;  where  the  increment  of  wealth  is  not  yet 
great  enough  to  enable  any  class  to  live  in  ease 
and  luxury;  where  the  best  house  is  but  a  cabin 
of  logs,  or  a  cloth  and  paper  shanty,  and  the 
richest  man  is  forced  to  daily  work — and  though 
you  will  find  an  absence  of  wealth  and  all  its 
concomitants,  you  will  find  no  beggars.  There 
is  no  luxury,  but  there  is  no  destitution.  No  one 
makes  an  easy  living,  nor  a  very  good  living ; 
but  every  one  can  make  a  living,  and  no  one 
able  and  willing  to  work  is  oppressed  by  the  fear 
of  want." 

The  foregoing  is  the  lie  which  is  part  a  truth. 

In  an  advancing  civilization  the  rich  grow  richer 

—that  is  true-^but  that  the  poor  grow  poorer  is 

not  true.    Nor  is  it  true  that  social  difficulties  (or 


A  LIE  WHICH  Is  PART  A  TRUTH         3 

poverty)  is  engendered  by  progress  itself.  (It  is 
to  be  presumed  that  everybody  will  admit  that 
in  a  retrograde  civilization  the  rich  and  the 
middle-class  grow  poorer,  and  the  poor  are  either 
forced  out  of  existence  or  driven  to  some  other 
community  that  is  more  progressive.) 

We  measure  riches  by  a  number  of  things. 
One  man  owns  a  thousand  acres  of  timber  land, 
another  a  gold  mine,  another  a  factory  or  a  mill, 
another  has  lots  of  gold  or  jewelry,  yet  all  are 
poor  if  they  cannot  get  food.  By  what  shall  we 
measure  poverty?  Is  not  poverty  always  to  be 
measured  by  the  availability  of  food?  Of  what 
value  is  gold  to  a  Crusoe  on  a  desert  island? 

A  certain  Eskimo  tribe  had  their  village  on 
the  shore  of  a  bay  where  the  seals  usually  came 
in  the  Fall  and  stayed  until  the  ice  went  out  of 
the  bay  in  the  Spring,  thus  furnishing  a  supply 
of  food,  which  was  easily  obtained  by  fishing 
through  the  ice. 

But  one  winter  the  seals  did  not  come  into  the 
bay  until  late  in  January,  and  one-third  of  the 
tribe  died  of  starvation. 

And  yet,  there  was  not  one  of  those  natives 
but  what  had  fur  clothes  and  bedding  that  would 
have  sold  for  hundreds  of  dollars  in  New  York 
city. 

Is  not  poverty  measured  by  the  availability  of 
food? 

During  the  first  year  of  the  settlement  at 
Jamestown,  Va.,  (in  1607,  by  105  persons,)  owing 
to  the  scarcity  and  badness  of  provisions,  one- 
half  (50  percent)  of  the  colony  died. 

At  this  same  Jamestown  settlement,  in  1610, 


4  PROGRESS 

a  most  distressing  famine  prevailed,  which  was 
known  for  many  years  afterward  by  the  name  of 
"the  starving  time."  So  dreadful  was  its  effect 
that,  in  the  space  of  six  months  the  colonists 
were  reduced  from  nearly  500  to  60,  (88  per  cent 
died). 

In  1622  there  was  "another  distressing  famine" 
at  Jamestown ;  and  in  1624  of  9000  persons  who 
had  been  sent  from  England  only  1800  remained 
in  the  colony. 

The  first  permanent  settlement  was  com- 
menced in  New  England  by  101  Puritans,  who 
landed  at  Plymouth,  Mass.,  Dec.  22,  1620.  One 
historian  says:  "Worn  down  with  their  long 
voyage,  excessive  fatigue,  the  severity  of  the 
weather,  and  the  want  of  comfortable  provisions 
and  habitations,  they  were,  soon  after  their 
arrival,  visited  with  distressing  sickness  and,  in 
three  months,  reduced  to  about  one-half  of  their 
original  number.  The  sickness  was  so  general 
that,  at  some  times,  there  were  only  six  or  seven 
well  persons  in  the  company."  .  .  .  "For 
several  years  the  whole  property  of  the  settlers 
was  held  in  common." 

If  holding  land  as  public  property,  or  in  com- 
mon, is  such  a  good  thing,  why  not  apply  it  to 
all  other  property?  Why  did  these  settlers 
abandon  it  after  several  years  trial? 

In  March,  1621,  the  Plymouth  settlers  learned 
from  Samoset,  a  friendly  Indian,  that  not  long 
before  a  mortal  pestilence  had  swept  off  almost 
all  the  Indians  in  the  vicinity.  The  historian 
only  gives  a  sentence  to  this  decimation  of  the 
Indians.  How  many  times  have  these  sparsely 


A  LIE  WHICH  Is  PART  A  TRUTH         5 

settled  sections  been  nearly  or  quite  depopulated 
and  no  mention  of  it  made  in  history? 

In  the  cases  cited  the  land  was  practically  free, 
yet  the  people  starved,  they  were  so  poor.  They 
had  none  of  the  earmarks  of  poverty,  each  family 
owned  its  own  home,  though  it  was  of  logs,  and 
each  one  had  clothes  and  guns  and  tools  that 
would  have  made  them  seem  rich  to  the  vaga- 
bond of  the  city,  and  yet  they  (50  percent  of 
them)  could  not  make  a  living  and  died  of 
starvation.  No  city  poverty;  no  pestilence  in 
settled  countries,  where  the  land  was  owned 
by  private  individuals,  no  famine  in  thickly 
settled  communities,  ever  demanded  the  toll  of 
life  that  has  been  demanded  and  paid  by  these 
"new  communities"  where  there  are  "no  rich, 
no  luxuries,  no  beggars  and  no  destitution." 

Nor  are  these  exceptional  cases.  The  history 
of  the  settlement  of  most  countries  find  similar 
examples.  There  were  a  number  of  attempted 
settlements  in  this  country  where  the  would-be 
settlers  were  finally  obliged  to  take  to  their  ships 
and  sail  away  because  they  could  not  get  a 
living,  although  the  land  was  free. 

The  "single  taxers"  will  tell  you  that  in  old 
settlements  destitution  is  caused  by  private  own- 
ership of  land.  What  causes  it  in  these  new 
countries  where  the  land  is  free? 


CHAPTER  H. 
PERSONAL  ENEMIES. 

Woe  unto  the  world  because  of  occasions  of  stumbling !  for  it 
must  needs  be  that  the  occasions  come ;  but  woe  to  that  man 
through  whom  the  occasion  cometh !  Matthew  xviii,  7. 

All  of  those  things  which  make  for  poverty 
we  shall  class  as  enemies  of  progress. 

Are  "the  ills  that  flesh  is  heir  to"  caused  by 
some  one  thing;  or  are  the  causes  numerous? 

1.  How  about  false  teachers — the  blind  leaders 
of  the  blind?  Is  it  not  as  great  a  sin  to  teach  a 
political  or  an  economic  falsehood  as  it  is  a  relig- 
ious one?  Political  untruth — a  belief  in  the 
right  to  own  human  beings — led  to  the  civil 
war;  and  the  present  world  war  is  owing  a 
belief  in  political  untruths  :  An  excessive  na- 
tionalism, misnamed  patriotism ;  the  doctrine  of 
the  survival  of  the  fittest  as  developed  in  Ger- 
many into  the  cult  of  the  superman,  and  the 
"will  to  power,"  and  "a  place  in  the  sun" ;  a 
mistaken  conception  of  the  state  as  something 
above  the  law  of  nations ;  the  exaltation  of  force, 
especially  military  force. 

Can  we  not  set  down  false  economic  belief, 
which  leads  to  false  economic  action,  as  one 
enemy  of  progress? 


PERSONAL  ENEMIES.  7 

2.  Some  people  are  improvident.    They  are 
perfectly  satisfied  if  they  have  enough  for  today 
and  literally  "take  no  thought  for  tomorrow" 
what  they  shall  eat,  or  what  they  shall  drink,  or 
wherewithal  shall  they  be  clothed;  and  some 
day  business  slacks  up  and  they  are  out  of  work, 
or  sickness  comes  and  they  are  unable  to  work. 

If  when  sickness  comes  they  are  on  the  trail 
in  one  of  the  new  countries,  they  not  unfre- 
quently  sink  down  and  die,  and  some  future 
traveler  finds  the  body  and  wonders  what  caused 
the  death.  Is  not  the  fact  that  the  penalty  for 
improvidence  is  so  severe,  in  new  countries,  the 
reason  why  men  never  sell  their  guns  or  cloth- 
ing for  food  in  those  countries ;  and  to  meet  a 
traveler  and  tell  him  that  you  were  out  of  food 
and  hungry  would  be  almost  certain  to  result  in 
an  invitation  to  join  him  at  meal;  and  you  would 
not  be  expected  to  sell  your  gun  or  clothes  to 
pay  for  it.  Even  if  you  had  money,  the  chances 
are  it  would  not  be  accepted. 

If  the  improvident  one  is  living  in  a  large  city 
when  adversity  comes,  he  probably  first  sells 
some  of  his  clothes,  tools,  or  jewelry,  or  he 
applies  to  one  of  the  charities  and  becomes  one 
of  the  "submerged  tenth." 

Does  it  not  look  as  if  improvidence  were  one 
of  the  enemies  of  progress? 

3.  Some  people  are  lazy.   The  hook  worm  may 
have  something  to  do  with  it,  in  some  cases ;  it 
might  then  be  treated  as  a  disease.    The  Bible 
says:  "The  soul  of  the  sluggard  desireth  and 
hath  nothing."    "He  also  that  is  slothful  in  his 
work  is  a  brother  to  him  that  is  a  great  waster." 


8  PROGRESS 

"I  went  by  the  field  of  the  slothful,  and  by  the 
vineyard  of  the  man  void  of  understanding ;  and, 
lo,  it  was  all  grown  over  with  thorns,  and  nettles 
had  covered  the  face  thereof,  and  the  stone  wall 
thereof  was  broken  down." 

Do  you  not  think  that  laziness  is  an  enemy 
of  progress?  And  is  it  not  just  as  much  an 
enemy  whether  it  be  a  disease,  or  whether  it  be 
a  crime?  Of  course,  if  it  is  a  disease,  it  should 
be  treated  as  such ;  and  if  it  is  a  crime  it  should 
be  punished. 

4.  We  must  also  consider  that  brother  of  lazi- 
ness, wastefulness.  It  is  claimed  that  the  Amer- 
ican people  waste  enough  food  to  feed  the  people 
of  France.  This  may  be  an  exaggeration,  but 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  waste,  whether  it  be 
great  or  small,  is  an  enemy  of  progress.  "Waste 
not,  want  not." 

Two  men,  working  at  the  same  business  and 
receiving  the  same  pay,  one  will  save  and  be- 
come well-to-do  while  the  other  will  barely  make 
a  living,  or,  perhaps,  be  in  debt  most  of  the  time. 
If  sickness  comes,  the  one  will  have  enough  in 
the  bank  to  carry  him  through  his  sickness, 
while  the  other  has  to  ask  help  of  his  friends 
and  shopmates,  and,  perhaps,  public  charity. 

In  our  large  cities,  in  normal  times,  it  is  said 
that  one  in  ten  of  the  population  apply  for  and 
receive  some  form  of  charity  each  year;  and 
when  it  comes  to  death,  the  burial  expenses  of 
one  in  ten  are  paid,  partly  or  wholly,  by  friends 
or  relatives  of  the  deceased  or  by  some  form  of 
charity.  These  are  spoken  of  as  the  "submerged 
tenth."  Of  course  this  "submerged  tenth"  is  a 


PERSONAL  ENEMIES  9 

constantly  changing  crowd.  One  person  may 
be  helped  for  a  short  time,  until  he  finds  work, 
or  until  .he  gets  over  some  sickness,  and  he 
may  never  need  aid  again ;  another  may  need 
help  constantly;  while  still  another  may  need 
aid  intermittently ;  some  are  never  able  to  get 
through  a  winter  without  help. 

Can  not  the  existence  of  this  "submerged 
tenth,"  in  normal  times,  be  traced  directly  to 
one  or  more  of  the  four  personal  causes  men- 
tioned? 1.  False  economic  belief,  as  "the  world 
owes  me  a  living,"  whether  I  work  for  it  or  not. 
2.  Improvidence.  3.  Laziness.  4.  Wastefulness. 

These  four  enemies  may  be  called  personal, 
but  there  are  other  enemies,  which  are  outside 
and,  perhaps,  beyond  the  power  of  the  individual 
to  control.  These  we  will  consider  in  another 
chapter. 


CHAPTER  HI. 
NATURAL  ENEMIES. 

For  he  saith  to  the  snow,  Be  thou  on  the  earth ;  likewise  to 
the  small  rain,  and  to  the  great  rain  of  his  strength. 

He  causeth  it  to  come,  whether  for  correction,  or  for  his  land, 
or  for  mercy.  Job  xxxvii,  6,  13. 

Poverty  is  caused  by  a  number  of  things,  besides 
those  inherent  in  the  individual.  A  man,  or  a 
people,  may  be  provident,  economical,  industri- 
ous and  saving  and  yet  be  unable  to  progress. 

There  are  certain  things  in  nature,  which  we 
will  call  natural  enemies.  These  may  not,  in 
and  of  themselves,  be  enemies,  but  become  so 
because  they  occur  in  too  great,  or  too  small, 
quantities.  Here  are  some  of  them : 

1.  Rain,  when  it  comes  in  excessive  quantities, 
causing  floods,  washouts,  rot,  and  the  killing  of 
earth-worms  which  fertilize  the  soil. 

2.  Frost — Early  in  the  Fall  frosts  prevent  the 
working  of   the  soil  and  the  sowing  of   the 
Autumn  seed.    Frosts  late  in  the  Spring  prevent 
sowing,  and  often  seriously  injure  young  crops. 
Many  famines  are  the  direct  result  of  frost. 

3.  Drouth — The  fertility  of  the  earth  depends, 
very  largely  on  the  rainfall.    About  1610,  owing 
to  lack  of  rain  at  the  head  waters  of  the  Nile, 
that  river  failed  to  overflow  its  banks  for  seven 


NATURAL  ENEMIES  11 

successive  years,  causing  one  of  the  greatest 
famines  of  history.  Any  farmer  can  tell  you  of 
the  disastrous  consequences  of  a  long  continued 
drouth. 

4.  Earthquakes — Not  only  is  the  devastation 
in  the  immediate  locality  of  the  quake  to  be  con- 
sidered, but  also  the  great  damage  caused  when 
inruptions  of  the  sea  or  inland  waters  have  been 
produced,  which  has  not  unfrequently  been  the 
case. 

5.  Volcanoes— Aug  26  and  27,  1883,  an  erup- 
tion of  Mount  Krakatoa  and  about  two-thirds  of 
the  other  46  volcanoes  on  the  island  of  Java  re- 
sulted in  the  submergence  of  a  tract  of  land 
about  the  size  of  the  State  of  Massachusetts  and 
the  destruction  of  Anjer  and  other  places  and 
their  inhabitants.     Vesuvius,  in  79  A.  D.,  de- 
stroyed the  two  Italian  cities  of  Pompeii  and 
Herculaneum.    Mount  Pelee  on  the  Island  of 
Martinique,  French  West  Indies,  on  May  8, 1902, 
destroyed  the  city  of  St.  Pierre,  with  about 
30,000    inhabitants.    And  there  have  been  other 
cases,  too  numerous  to  mention,  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  life  and  property  by  volcanoes. 

6.  Hurricanes  and  Storms — These  frequently 
produce  widespread  injury,  destroying  buildings 
and  crops  and  often  causing  a  loss  of  life.    They 
also  lead  to  inruptions  of  the  sea  and  overflow 
of  rivers. 

7.  Hailstorms — Grain  and  fruit  produce  of  all 
kinds  are  injured,  if  not  totally  destroyed,  when 
severe  hailstorms  occur  in  the  Summer  or  Au- 
tumn months,  when  they  are  most  prevalent. 

8.  Insects,  Vermin,  etc  —  Locusts  have  fre- 


12  PROGRESS 

quently  been  the  cause  of  famine  in  some  of  our 
Western  States,  as  well  as  in  China,  India  and 
Egypt.  Concerning  the  latter  we  read:  "Very 
grievous  were  they ;  before  them  there  were  no 
such  locusts  as  they,  neither  after  them  shall  be 
such.  For  they  covered  the  face  of  the  whole 
earth,  so  that  the  land  was  darkened ;  and  they 
did  eat  every  herb  of  the  land,  and  all  the  fruit 
of  the  trees  which  the  hail  had  left ;  and  there 
remained  not  any  green  in  the  trees,  or  in  the 
herbs  of  the  field,  through  all  the  land  of 
Egypt"— Exodus  x,  14, 14. 

In  1812-13  there  was  a  plague  of  rats  in  the 
Madras  presidency,  which  in  part  caused  the 
famine  of  that  year. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
ARTIFICIAL  ENEMIES. 

Some  troubles  are  by  nature  given, 
And  it  seems  we  are  hard  to  sate, 

Because  for  others  we  have  striven, 
And  yet  we  dare  to  call  them  fate. 

There  are  certain  enemies  of  progress  that 
are  made  by  man.  These  we  will  call  artificial 
enemies.  Following  are  some  of  them  : 

1.  War — The  cultivation  of  the  soil  is  directly 
retarded  by  using  the  fields  for  battle-grounds 
and  maneuvers,  and  indirectly  by  calling  the 
people  from  agricultural  pursuits  to  arms.    Fre- 
quently the  crops  of  whole  districts  are  design- 
edly destroyed  or  incidentally  devastated.    Fam- 
ines in  localities  or  towns  are  often  caused  by 
blockades  or  otherwise  intercepting  supplies.    A 
large  quantity  of  grain  is  damaged  every  year, 
in  times  of  peace,  by  being  kept  in  military 
stores  in  different  parts  of  the  world.     War 
may  be  forced  upon  a  people,  and  it  then  be- 
comes a  virtue  to  defend  right  and  liberty,  but, 
even  so,  it  is  a  man-made  evil. 

2.  Defective  Agriculture --This  may  result 
from  ignorance,  indifference,  or  unsuitability  of 


14  PROGRESS 

climate  or  location.  Where  the  product  of  the 
soil  but  barely  meets  the  current  requirements 
of  the  inhabitants  it  is  clear  that  either  the  fail- 
ure of  one  season's  crops,  or  the  sudden  influx 
of  any  great  number  of  strangers,  may  produce 
at  least  temporary  famine. 

3.  Defective  Transportation — This  may  arise 
from  bad  roads,  or  want  of  roads,  perhaps  the 
railroads  need  double  tracks,  or  there  may  not 
be  sufficient  terminal  facilities,  or  rolling  stock, 
or  there  may  be  an  absence  of  canals  or  a  lack 
of  shipping,  or  there  may  be  willful  obstruction 
for  the  sake  of  securing  some  desired  concession 
from  the  government. 

It  has  frequently  happened  that  there  would 
be  a  famine  prevailing  in  one  part  of  a  country 
with  a  superabundance  in  another.  The  intro- 
duction of  canals  and  railroads  has  largely  re- 
moved this  difficulty,  especially  in  settled  coun- 
tries. 

4.  Legislative  Interference — All  laws  relating 
to  trade  in  or  transportation  of  food  stuffs  must 
be  designed  to  change  the  natural  course  of 
supply  and  demand,  and  there  can  scarcely  be  a 
doubt  that  in  many  instance  the  change  has 
been  for  the  worse,  else  why  have  so  many  of 
those  laws  been  repealed? 

5.  Currency  Restrictions — "Penkethman  says, 
under  date  of  1124:  'By  means  of  changing  the 
coine  all  things  became  very  deere,  whereof  an 
extreme  famine  did  arise  and  afflict  the  multi- 
tude of  the  people  unto  death/    Other  instances 
occurred  as  in  1248, 1390  and  1586."— (Ency- 
clopaedia Britannica.) 


ARTIFICIAL  ENEMIES  15 

6.  Speculation — There  have  been  various  laws 
at  diverse  times  to  prevent  speculators  enhanc- 
ing the  price  of  food.    The  "Food  Control  Bill" 
is  such  a  measure,  intended  to  prevent  specula- 
tors sending  wheat  and  flour  across  the  ocean, 
paying  carrying  charges,  and  selling  them  so  low- 
that  the  retail  prices  to  the  consumer  are  less  in 
those  countries  than  they  are  at  home. 

7.  Misapplication  of  Grain — By  burning  it, 
whether  willfully  or  accidentally,  as  well  as  by 
the  use  of  grain  in  brewing  and  distilling.    We 
find  it  is  recorded  that  the  Londoners,  in  1315, 
"considering  that  wheat  was  much  consumed  by 
the  converting  thereof  into  mault,  ordained  that 
from  thence  it  was  to  be  made  of  other  grains." 
This  order  was  afterward  extended  by  the  king 
(Edward  II)  through  the  whole  kingdom.    So 
you  see  prohibiting  the  use  of  grain  for  the 
manufacture  of  liquor  is  no  new  idea. 

8.  Deforestation  —  The  leaves  of  the  forest, 
falling  on  the  ground,  form  a  mulch  which 
acts  as  a  sponge  and  stores  the   rain  as  it 
falls  and  allows  it  to  filter  gradually  into  the 
streams  and  maintain  a  constant  flow  of  water 
in  them.    Cutting  the  forests  causes  the  streams 
to  become  torrents  when  it  rains,  to  be  followed 
shortly  afterward  by  dried-up  beds  and  gullies. 
This  destroys  the  farm  lands  and  causes  famine. 
One  writer  says:   "So  great  indeed  were  the 
devastations  from  which  the  Alpine  districts 
(Hautes  and  Basses)  suffered  through  the  de- 
nudation of  the  mountain  sides,  and  consequent 
formation  of  torrents,  that  intervention  of  the 
most  prompt  description  became  necessary  to 


16  PROGRESS 

prevent  the  destruction,  not  only  of  the  grazing 
grounds  themselves,  but  of  the  rich  valleys 
below  them." 

9.  Trusts  —  While  corporations  and  trusts 
were  intended  as  instruments  of  progress  there 
have  been  numerous  instances  in  which  they 
have  been  just  the  opposite,  as  when  they  have 
sold  goods  below  the  cost  of  production  in  one 
neighborhood,  for  the  sake  of  ruining  a  small 
competitor,  while  they  kept  the  price  up  in  a 
dozen  other  localities ;  or  when  they  have  bought 
a  patent  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  its  man- 
ufacture and  sale. 

We  have  mentioned  twenty-one  enemies  of 
progress — four  personal,  eight  natural  and  nine 
artificial.  There  may  be  others,  but  those  men- 
tioned are  so  well  known  that  there  seems  to  be 
no  dispute  among  rational  men  as  to  their  exist- 
ence ;  and  that  is  the  only  class  with  whom  we 
care  to  reason. 


CHAPTER  V. 
BACK  TO  THE  LAND? 

Back  to  the  land,  then,  if  you  will, 
Sunshine  and  shadow  will  be  there  still. 

If  poverty  depends  primarily  upon  the  avail- 
able supply  of  food,  then  those  things  which 
tend  to  diminish  either  the  food  supply  or  its 
availability  tend  to  produce  poverty.  That  is  to 
say  the  twenty-one  causes  enumerated. 

When  business  is  good,  and  there  is  plenty  of 
work,  you  do  not  hear  much  about  people  anx- 
ious to  get  "back  to  the  land."  Why?  Because 
most  people,  who  are  not  tillers  of  the  soil,  are 
not  because  they  do  not  wish  to  be. 

If  they  attempt  to  become  farmers  only  when 
business  is  dull  they  are  doomed  to  failure,  be- 
cause "dull  business"  and  "poor  crops"  are  so 
nearly  related  that  the  one  is  dependant  on  the 
other. 

Who  ever  heard  of  "dull  times"  the  Tall  or 
Winter  after  a  bumper  harvest? 

Why  assume  that  free  access  to  the  soil  would 
banish  poverty?  Would  it  make  the  lazy  man 
smart?  Would  it  cause  rain  where  there  is  a 
drouth?  Or  would  it  check  any  one  of  the 
twenty-one  evils  mentioned  in  the  preceding 
chapters?  Yet  there  are  people  who  think  that 


18  PROGRESS 

free  access  to  the  soil  is  a  panacea  for  all  ills. 

Would  it  not  lessen  the  productivity  of  the 
soil  by  causing  men  to  be  more  sparing  of  their 
improvements,  lest  some  one  should  step  in  and 
reap  the  benefit  of  those  improvements? 

Why  assume  that,  in  a  settled  community,  the 
wealth  of  the  community  belongs  to,  or  should 
belong  to  the  whole  people?  May  there  not  be 
a  large  percentage  of  the  people  who  have  done 
nothing  to  produce  that  wealth ;  who  have  con- 
sumed more  wealth  than  they  have  produced? 

The  man  who  went  out  on  the  prairie  and 
selected  the  first  farm  hardly  knew  which  to 
choose,  all  were  so  good.  The  second  man  had 
no  such  trouble.  He  knew  that  the  best  place 
for  him  was  alongside  the  man  that  had  already 
staked  his  claim.  The  settlers  continued  to 
locate  until  there  were  ten  farmers,  and  then, 
one  day,  came  another  man,  a  Mr.  D.  Broke, 
who  said  to  the  first  man,  Mr.  A: 

"Can  you  give  me  a  job?  I  have  no  farming 
tools,  and  have  not  the  food  and  clothing  neces- 
sary to  keep  me  until  I  could  harvest  a  crop, 
and  you  could  do  better  by  hiring  me  as  two 
men  working  together  can  do  more  work  than 
two  men  working  separately." 

So  Mr.  A  hired  Mr.  D.  Broke,  who  worked 
until  the  harvesting  was  finished,  when  he  re- 
ceived his  pay  and  started  for  the  distant  town, 
and  the  money  which  should  have  gone  for 
farming  tools  and  food  and  clothing  and  seed 
was  spent  in  riotous  living,  and  in  less  than  a 
month  he  was  at  the  farm  to  ask  for  a  job  again. 
But  Mr.  A  did  not  need  a  man.  He  could  do  all 


BACK  TO  THE  LAND?  19 

the  work  there  was  to  be  done  on  the  farm  at 
that  time  of  the  year  himself. 

"If  you  want  to  take  up  a  claim,  I'll  help  you 
build  a  cabin,  and  so  will  the  other  settlers." 

"It's  no  use,"  said  Broke,  "I  have  no  tools,  nor 
nor  food,  nor  seed,  nor  money." 

"But  I  paid  you  much  more  for  last  Summer's 
work  than  I  can  afford  to  if  I  were  to  hire  you 
in  the  Winter." 

"But,  you  will  not  let  me  starve !  I'll  work 
for  my  board  if  you  will  let  me  stay  through 
the  Winter." 

And  so  Mr.  A  hired  a  man  that  he  did  not 
need.  A  man  that  had  consumed  in  one  month 
all  that  he  had  produced  by  six  month's  labor, 
and  then  had  to  supported  for  five  months  by  a 
charitably  inclined  employer. 

What  right  had  such  a  man  to  any  portion  of 
the  community  increase  in  value?  Had  he  not 
consumed  all  that  he  produced? 

The  ten  farms  undoubtedly  had  increased  in 
value.  Each  farm  was  worth  two  or  three  times 
what  the  first  farm  was  when  the  first  settler 
built  his  cabin.  What  caused  this  increase  in 
value?  Surely  not  Mr.  Broke,  because  he  did 
not  appear  until  the  farms  were  settled  and  the 
greater  part  of  the  increase  already  there,  and 
when  he  did  come  he  became  a  burden,  for  a 
part  of  the  year  at  least,  upon  the  community, 
or  upon  one  member  of  it.  The  increase  in 
value,  in  this  case,  was  caused  by  the  industry 
and  thrift  of  the  property  owners,  and  as  each 
continued  to  own  the  farm  upon  which  he  set- 


20  PROGRESS 

tied,  each  had  the  benefit  of  whatever  increase 
in  value  there  was. 

Who  will  say  that  Mr.  Broke  is  entitled  to  any 
part  of  that  increase  in  value? 

Mr  Broke  would  no  doubt  say  he  was  cheated 
out  of  his  rightful  share  of  what  he  produced, 
but  Mr  Broke  would  say  anything  that  would 
prevent  him  reaping  the  reward  of  his  folly,  or 
sin. 

Of  course,  it  may  be  said  that  Mr.  Broke  did 
not  "consume"  in  less  than  one  month  all  that 
he  had  produced  in  six  months.  That  some 
land  sharks — in  the  shape  of  rum-sellers,  gam- 
blers and  bad  women — had  robbed  him  of  his 
hard-earned  money.  Even  if  they  did,  that  was 
not  the  fault  of  the  farming  community  in 
which  he  earned  that  money,  nor  of  anyone  in 
that  community.  It  might  be  a  good  reason  for 
a  war  of  extermination  against  the  sharks.  But 
there  is  a  chance  for  two  opinions  about  that. 

Rev  Dr  Francis  G.  Peabody  in  a  lecture  in  the 
Harvard  Medical  School  (Boston  Post,  Jan.  8, 
1917,)  said:  "The  saloon-keeper  is  considered 
the  fundamental  criminal,  but  all  saloons  would 
close  within  a  week  if  there  was  no  demand  for 
their  goods.  A  systematic  study  of  the  patron- 
age of  saloons,  made  by  myself  and  verified  by 
the  highest  police  authorities,  brought  out  the 
appalling  fact  that  a  number  of  people  equal  to 
one-half  the  population  of  Greater  Boston  en- 
tered the  city's  saloons  in  one  day. 

"If  minors  and  women,  who  had  no  right 
there,  were  deducted,  the  patronage  was  as  if 
every  man  in  the  city  went  in  every  day  and 


BACK  TO  THE  LAND?  21 

every  other  day  took  with  him  a  man  from  the 
country." 

We  visited  last  Summer  one  of  the  abandoned 
farms  of  New  Hampshire.  The  town  had  taken 
it  for  nonpayment  of  taxes.  Hence,  it  is  now 
owned  by  the  public.  The  town  would  be  glad 
to  get  rid  of  it  for  the  taxes.  There  will  always 
be  taxes,  though,  if  the  town  is  the  owner,  you 
might  call  it  rent.  The  farther  the  farm  is  from 
a  railroad  station  or  a  market  the  greater  the 
need  for  taxes,  to  build  and  repair  roads,  and  the 
less  the  ability  to  pay.  There  are  several  thou- 
sand abandoned  farms  in  New  England.  Aban- 
doned because  the  former  owners  could  not 
make  a  living. 

Let  us  briefly  compare  the  loss  of  life  by  some 
of  the  greatest  famines  and  plagues  in  history, 
where  the  land  was  owned  by  private  parties, 
with  the  loss  of  life  in  the  "new"  settlements  of 
this  country  where  the  people  had  practically 
free  access  to  the  land. 

"The  Great  Plague  of  London,  1664-5.  The 
total  number  of  deaths  from  the  plague  in  that 
year  according  to  the  bills  of  mortality  was 
68,596,  in  a  population  estimated  at  460,000,  out 
of  whom  two-thirds  are  supposed  to  have  fled 
to  escape  the  contagion." — [Encyclopaedia  Brit- 
annica.  That  is  to  say  14  9-10  percent  of  the 
population  died.  While  at  Jamestown,  in  1607, 
50  percent  died ;  and  in  1610,  88  percent ;  and  at 
Plymouth,  in  1621,  50  percent. 

"It  has  been  estimated  that  the  mor- 


22  PROGRESS 

tality  which  occurred  in  the  provinces  under 
British  administration  [in  India]  during  the 
period  of  famine  and  drouth  extending  over  the 
years  1877  and  1878  amounted,  on  a  populanion 
of  197  millions  to  five  and  one-quarter  millions 
in  excess  of  the  deaths  that  would  have  occurred 
had  the  season  been  ordinarily  healthy." — [Ibid.] 
Less  than  3  percent  of  the  population. 

In  Ireland,  in  1845,  the  population  was 
8,294,061,  the  greater  part  of  whom  depended 
on  the  potato  only  for  food.  In  1847  the  famine 
came.  "From  200,000  to  300,000  perished  of 
starvation  or  of  fever  caused  by  insufficient 
food."— [Ibid.]  But  300,000  was  only  3  6-10 
percent  of  the  population. 

In  view  of  these  facts  is  it  not  absurd  to  say 
that  access  to  the  land  will  prevent  pestilence  or 
starvation? 


CHAPTER  VI. 
Is  IT  A  REMEDY? 

Then  if  any  man  shall  say  unto  you,  Lo,  here  is  the  Christ, 
or,  Here ;  believe  it  not.  For  there  shall  arise  false  Christs,  and 
false  prophets,  and  shall  show  great  signs  and  wonders ;  so  as  to 
lead  astray,  if  possible,  even  the  elect.  Matthew  xxiv,  23, 24. 

The  following  quotations  are  from  "Progress 
and  Poverty": 

"We  must  make  land  common  property." 

"We  shall  not  only  not  think  of  giving  the 
land  holders  any  compensation  for  the  land,  but 
shall  take  all  the  improvements  and  whatever 
else  they  may  have  as  well. 

"But  I  do  not  propose  .  .  .  to  go  so  far. 
It  is  sufficient  if  the  people  resume  the  owner- 
ship of  the  land.  Let  the  land  owners  retain 
their  improvements  and  personal  property." 

"Why  continue  to  permit  the  land  owners  to 
take  the  rent,  or  compensate  them  in  any  man- 
ner for  the  loss  of  rent." 

"By  the  time  the  people  of  any  such  country 
as  England  or  the  United  States  are  sufficiently 
aroused  to  the  injustice  and  disadvantages  of 
individual  ownership  of  land  to  induce  them  to 
attempt  its  nationalization,  they  will  be  suffi- 


24  PROGRESS 

ciently  aroused  to  nationalize  it  in  a  much  more 
direct  and  easy  way  than  by  purchase.  They 
will  not  trouble  themselves  about  compensating 
the  proprietors  of  land.  Nor  is  it  right  that 
there  should  be  any  concern  about  the  proprie- 
tors of  the  land." 

"What  I,  therefore,  propose,  as  the  simple  yet 
sovereign  remedy,  which  will  raise  wages,  in- 
crease the  earnings  of  capital,  extirpate  pauper- 
ism, abolish  poverty,  give  remunerative  employ- 
ment to  whoever  wishes  it,  afford  free  scope  to 
human  powers,  lessen  crime,  elevate  morals,  and 
taste,  and  intelligence,  purify  government  and 
carry  civilization  to  yet  nobler  heights,  is — to 
appropriate  rent  by  taxation." 

"To  abolish  all  taxation  save  that  upon  land 
values." 

Why  must  we  make  land  common  property? 

It  is  said  that  primitive  peoples  held  land  in 
common.  Primitive  peoples  also  went  naked, 
or  clothed  themselves  with  the  skins  of  animals, 
and  they  dwelt  in  caves,  or  tents.  But  primitive 
peoples  gave  up  that  kind  of  life  for  something 
better,  and  so  far  as  we  can  find  holding  land  in 
common  was  given  up  by  those  peoples  of  their 
own  accord. 

"In  every  stage  the  conditions  of  its  [the 
land's]  enjoyment  and  use  have  been  absolutely 
regulated  by  the  community  in  reference  to  the 
general  wellfare."— [Encyc.  Brit. 

Then  why  go  back  to  primitive  man  for  our 
laws? 


Is  IT  A  REMEDY?  25 


The  right  of  the  government  to  take  the  land, 
or  any  other  form  of  property,  when  public 
necessity  (or  pleasure)  require  it,  has  never  been 
questioned  in  this  country.  But  when  it  has 
been  thus  taken — for  parks,  streets,  etc — it  has 
usually  been  paid  for,  and  at  a  rate  in  excess  of 
its  real  value. 

To  take  the  land  without  compensation  might 
be  like  freeing  the  negroes  without  compensa-* 
tion — an  expensive  operation. 

The  British  government  in  abolishing  slavery 
in  the  British  West  Indies  paid  $100,000,000  to 
the  slaveholders.  The  United  States  in 
its  slaves/of  a  money  value  of  $2,000,000,000, 
had  a  civil  war  which  cost,  it  is  estimated, 
$8,000,000,000,  and  caused  the  death  of  300,000 
on  each  side.  What  a  saving  might  have  been 
effected  if  the  slaves  had  been  bought  and  liber- 
ated? What  a  saving  of  life  and  property? 

To  abolish  all  taxes  save  that  on  land  values 
instead  of  being  a  cure  for  all  ills,  is  sure  to  re- 
sult  in  evil.  No  limitation  to  trusts,*  liquor  or 
drugs.  No  licenses  of  any  kind,  for  licenses  are 
a  form  of  taxation.  No  country  ever  did  exist 
that  had  but  a  single  tax. 

It  appears  that  the  economic  as  well  as  the 
human  body  is  a  complex  organization  with 
many  enemies.  Every  little  while  some  new 
teacher  will  spring  up,  with,  perhaps,  some  old 
and  almost  forgotten  theory,  and  cry  "Life  is 
simple!  Here  is  a  simple  remedy  for  all  its 
ills!" 

Already  the  real  estate  of  Boston  is  bearing 


26  PROGRESS 

Lx 

*~3QO££i  than  three-quarters  of  the  taxes  in  that 
city.  There  is  no  talk  of  lessening  the  amount 
of  money  obtained  by  taxation,  but  rather  of 
increasing  it. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  our  present 
laws  are  the  result  of  the  experience  of  past 
ages,  and  should  not  be  thoughtlessly  cast  aside 
lest  the  evil  they  were  designed  to  suppress  be 
upon  us. 

One  of  the  cries  of  these  would-be  reformers 
rovements!    Why  fine  a 

SFfor  erecting  a  ten-story  building ;  and  thus 
try  to  prevent  labor  from  obtaining  the  work?" 

This  is  a  cunning  question  by  which  is  sought 
to  secure  the  support  of  the  rich  man  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  working  man  on  the  other. 

Mr  A  has  a  lot  of  land  in  a  city,  50x100  feet, 
on  which  he  erects  a  12-story  building,  during 
the  erection  of  which  two  men  were  killed,  and 
their  families  left  to  be  supported  by  the  com- 
munity. Mr.  B  has  the  next  lot  of  the  same 
size  on  which  he  builds  a  one-story  building. 
Nobody  was  injured  its  construction.  And  yet 
we  are  told  that  Mr.  B  should  pay  as  large  a  tax 
as  Mr.  A  because  he  has  as  large  a  lot  of  land 
in  just  as  valuable  a  location.  And  it  is  pmpo§fH  ^ 
to  put  additional  taxes  on  the  land,  or  on  land 
values,  which  is  much  the  same. 

Who  should  pay  for  the  support  of  the  fami- 
lies of  the  men  killed  while  the  sky-scraper  was 
in  course  of  construction? 

Who  should  pay  for  the  high-pressure  water 
system,  and  the  water  towers  and  the  loss  of 


Is  IT  A  REMEDY?  27 

life  by  falling  walls  at  fires,  all  of  which  are 
caused  by  high  buildings? 

Suppose  Mr.  B's  lot  had  no  building  on  it. 
Must  he  still  pay  for  all  these  and  police  protec- 
tion as  well,  though  he  has  nothing  to  protect, 
and  is  in  no  way  benefited  by  them? 

Does  the  danger  to  the  community  cease  with 
the  erection  of  a  tall  building? 

A  short  time  ago  a  man  who  was  washing 
windows  on  the  sixth  story  of  a  building  on 
Washington  st,  fell  and  was  killed.  Two  paint-  >o^ 
ers  were  working  on  a  stage  at  the  sixth  story 
of  a  building  on  Cornhill ;  one  end  of  the  stage 
gave  away  and  one  man  was  killed  and  the 
other  maimed  for  life.  Every  few  months  you 
read  of  some  one  walking  into  an  elevator  well 
and  being  killed  or  maimed. 

These  accidents  don't  happen  on  vacant  land, 
and  seldom  on  one  or  two-story  buildings,    As 
you  increase  the  hight  of  your  buildings  the  I 
number  of  accidents  increase. 

If  the  owners  are  to  pay  no  tax  on  buildings,^ 
who  pays  for  the  support  of  those  renderecT" 
destitute  by  accidents  such  as  here  cited? 

I  am  informed  that  there  is  never  a  sky- 
scraper erected  that  there  are  not  two  or  three 
lives  lost  in  its  construction.  And  that  the  in- 
surance companies  refuse  to  place  insurance  on 
the  steel  workers  who  put  up  the  frames  of 
those  buildings,  and  they  have  to  depend  on 
their  trade  unions  for  insurance. 

"Why  tax  industry?"    Asks  these  reformers. 
How  can  you  tax  anything  but  industry?. 


28  PROGRESS 

A  neighbor  of  mine  has  been  paying  a  tax  for 
30  or  40  years  on  a  vacant  lot  which  he  inher- 
ited. As  he  derived  no  income  from  the  lot,  that 
tax  was  a  tax  on  his  industry.  If  he  had  been 
able  to  rent  the  lot,  the  tax  would  have  been 
paid  by  the  industry  of  the  tenant. 

Taxes  may  be  levied  indiscriminately,  but  if 
they  are  paid,  they  are  always  paid  by  industry. 

There  is  a  proposition  to  abolish  the  tax  on 
machinery,  because  that  is  a  tax  on  industry. 
It  is  rumored  that  the  Sure  Machinery  Company 
as  well  as  the  "single  taxers"  are  back  of  this. 

This  may  or  may  not  be  true,  but  we  can  see 
how  a  company  with  nearly  all  its  capital  in- 
vested in  machinery  might  wish  to  shift  its  tax 
on  to  the  land. 

A  certain  manufacturer  has  $1,000,000  worth 
of  machinery.  Every  three  or  four  months 
some  one  is  injured  in  the  machinery,  and  every 
three  or  four  years  some  one  is  killed,  and  his 
family,  if  he  have  any,  is  dependent  upon  the 
community  for  support. 

Why  should  not  the  man  who  owns  the 
machine  pay  a  tax  to  recompense  the  community 
for  the  damage  caused  by  the  machine? 

Does  he  not  make  an  increased  profit  because 
the  increase  of  production  caused  by  using  the 
machine? 

Why  do  not  these  would-be  reformers  seek  a 
remedy  for  some  of  the  twenty-one  real  enemies 
of  mankind  and  of  progress?  (See  Chapters 
II,  III  and  IV). 

Why  devote  their  energies  and  those  of  soci- 


Is  IT  A  REMEDY? 

ety  to  chasing  imaginary  evils,  when  there  are 
so  many  real  ones? 

Why  confiscate  the  property  of  certain  citi- 
zens (the  land  owners)  because  certain  other 
citizens  want  it? 

Would  not  this  confiscation  of  property  shake  ' 
the  faith  of  the  whole  community  in  the  justice 
of  our  government  and  make  them  wonder  if    ^     / 
any  kind  of  property  is  safe  under  that  govern- 
ment? 


CHAPTER  VII. 
THE  PROPORTIONAL  TAX 

Render  therefore  unto  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's; 
and  unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's.  Matthew  xxii,  21. 

Have  we  lost  sight  of  the  origin  of  govern- 
ment, and  the  foundation  of  all  taxes?  Men 
first  joined  themselves  together  for  protection- 
protection  of  their  homes,  their  lives,  their  prop- 
erty ;  and  each  man  gave  his  time  and  furnished 
his  own  food ;  but  as  civilization  progressed  it 
was  found  better  for  certain  men  to  give  all 
their  time  to  the  arts  of  war,  and  for  others  to 
pay,  by  means  of  a  tax,  for  the  protection  thus 
rendered. 

It  also  came  to  be  recognized  that  a  man 
should  pay  for  protection  in  proportion  to  what 
he  had  to  protect,  or  in  proportion  to  his  wealth. 

Why  should  not  the  man,  or  corporation,  with 
wealth  in  machinery,  buildings,  or  any  personal 
property  pay  for  their  protection? 

The  overthrow  of  this  government  by  a  for- 
eign government  might  result  in  the  buildings 
being  reduced  to  ashes,  the  machinery  to  junk 
and  the  other  personal  property  to  worthless 
rubbish. 

It  is  said  that  in  Liverpool  the  street  railways 


THE  PROPORTIONAL  TAX  31 

pay  all  the  taxes.    Under  a  tax  on  land  values 
only,  they  would  be  nearly  exempt  from  taxa- 
tion.   How  could  you  tax  them  for  the  "land 
value"  of  the  streets  which  they  use  in  common  * 
with  thousands  of  others. 

This  whole  land  question  is  an  importation 
from  England.  Mr.  Neilson,  a  former  member 
of  the  British  Parliament,  who  has  been  lectur- 
ing in  this  country,  says :  "The  last  valuation 
of  land  in  England  was  in  the  time  of  William 
and  Mary  (1688-1702)  and  much  of  the  land 
was  exempted  from  taxation  perpetually  in  con- 
sideration of  the  owners  paying  a  lump  s*m 
equal  to  between  ten  and  twenty  years  taxes  for 
the  support  of  the  nation." 

Not  only  were  the  valuations  of  200  years  ago 
very  low,  but  the  rate  of  taxation  was  also  very 
low,  so  that  in  many  instances  the  lump  sum 
which  was  paid  for  exemption  for  taxes  did  not 
amount  to  more  than  the  tax  for  two  years 
would  today.  The  people  of  England  of  today 
think  it  unjust  that  land,  some  of  which  has 
increased  in  value  ten-fold,  should  escape  tax- 
ation for  the  government  expenses  of  today 
because  of  something  which  happened  two 
hundred  years  ago. 

But  in  this  country  there  is  no  such  exemp- 
tion of  land  from  taxation. 

In  some  of  the  settlements  in  this  country 
lots  were  cast  for  the  farms  and  town  lots. 

Land  has  no  value  except  as  it  is  touched  byj  ^f  r* 
or  comes  in  contact  with,  either  labor  or  capital  J 
Go  to  the  new  country  and  the  land  has  little  or 


32  PROGRESS 

no  value,  because  neither  capital  nor  labor  has 
been  expended  on  it. 

A  manufacturing  company  goes  back  into  the 
country,  where  land  is  cheap,  and  buys  a  hun- 
dred acres  of  land  on  some  stream,  and  builds 
a  dam,  erects  buildings,  and  moves  its  factory 
from  some  city  where  their  taxes  have  been 
increased  from  50  to  100  percent  in  less  than 
twenty  years.  It  brings  its  workmen,  and  a 
village  springs  up.  The  land  for  miles  around 
becomes  more  valuable,  because  the  farmers 
have  a  market  nearer  home  than  formerly. 

This  increase  in  value  is  not  because  of  any 
good-will,  or  conscious  effort,  on  the  part  of  the 
factory  employes.  We  have  known  of  several 
such  moves  on  the  part  of  corporations,  and  the 
employes,  invariably,  did  not  like  the  change, 
but  they  (the  greater  part  of  them,  at  least,) 
made  it  rather  than  be  out  of  work  and  have  to 
look  up  new  jobs.  When  they  have  finally 
moved,  they  found  that  the  cost  of  food,  which 
came  from  the  nearby  farms,  was  much  less  and 
the  quality  was  better  than  it  had  been  in  the 
place  from  which  they  came. 

The  increase  in  the  value  of  the  land  was  in 
spite  of  the  factory  employes,  and,  if  it  was  to 
be  credited  to  anybody  or  anything,  other  than 
the  owners  of  the  soil,  it  would  be  to  the  man- 
agers of  the  factory  and  to  the  capital  which 
they  expended.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  directors  of  the  factory  did  not  order 
its  removal  for  the  sake  of  enhancing  the  value 
of  the  farm  lands,  nor  for  the  purpose  of  bene- 


THE  PROPORTIONAL  TAX  33 

fitting  their  employes.    Their  reward  came  in 

the  reduced  taxation.  \4ftvt ' 

This  principle  of  capital  increasing  the  value  of 
other  property  than  that  on  which  it  is  expended 
is  well  understood.  Many  cities  and  towns  offer 
to  remit  taxes  if  certain  industries  will  locate 
within  their  boundaries.  It  is  not  unusual  for 
the  people  of  a  community  to  raise  money  to 
start  some  industry  which  they  think  would 
improve  business  and  thus  increase  the  value  of 
their  property. 

How  about  those  cities  or  towns  from  which 
industries  move  owing  to  the  increase  in  taxes? 

There  is  such  a  thing  as  a  town  becoming 
stagnant,  or  retrograding,  or  finally  being  aban- 
doned. 

What  is  the  cause  of  abandoned  cities  ? 

We  have  seen  mansions  and  factories  aban- 
doned, the  windows  boarded  up,  and  finally  sold 
for  one-fourth  their  cost,  because  the  owners 
could  not  pay  the  taxes,  and  the  single-taxers 
say:  "The  whole  value  of  the  land  may  be  taken      \  J  o  1 
in  taxation,  and  the  only  effect  will  be  to  stimii;/ 
late  industry,  to  open  new  opportunities  to  capi- 
tal, and  to  increase  the  production  of  wealth." 

"With  the  exception  of  certain  licenses  and  . 
stamp  duties,  which  may  be  made  almost  to  col- 
lect themselves,  but  which  can  be  relied  on  for 
only  a  trivial  amount  of  revenue,  a  tax  on  land 
values  can,  of  all  taxes,  be  most  easily  and 
cheaply  collected." — [Henry  George. 

If  licenses  and  stamp  duties  "almost  collect 
themselves,"  why  not  increase  their  number  and 


I 


34  PROGRESS 

amount  until  they  shall  become  the  rule  and  not 
the  exception? 

Since  George  wrote  his  book  the  number  of 
of  things  for  which  licenses  are  required  have 
greatly  increased,  and  the  increase  has  been 
because  of  public  demand.  For  instance,  there 
was  a  public  demand  that  automobiles  and  their 
drivers  be  licensed  as  a  protection  to  pedestrians 
on  the  streets. 

In  selecting  the  "easiest"  way  to  collect  taxes 
do  we  not  lose  sight  of  the  idea  of  protection? 
The  original  right  to  levy  any  tax  is  based  on 
protection.  The  robber  loots  the  bank  because 
it  is  "easier"  than  to  work  and  receive  his 
pay  in  small  quantities.  The  Germany  army 
marched  through  Belgium  because  it  was  the 
"easiest"  way.  Tax  assessors  and  law  makers 
may  loot  a  land-owner  of  property,  which  he 
honestly  acquired,  perhaps  by  years  of  hard 
labor.  Would  it  be  right? 

"Taxes  on  the  value  of  the  land  not  only  do 
not  check  production  as  do  most  other  taxes, 
but  they  tend  to  increase  production,  by  destroy- 
ing speculative  rent." — Ibid. 

Is  that  so?  We  had  thought  that  "specula- 
tive value"  and  "real  value"  were  so  intimately 
connected  that  you  could  not  change  the  one 
without  affecting  the  other. 

Let  it  become  known  that  a  city  or  town  has 
a  high  tax  rate,  and  investors  will  go  to  some 
other  town  to  buy  or  build,  and  those  whd  are 
in  the  town  will  try  to  move  away,  often  making 
big  sacrifices  in  selling  their  property  rather 
than  continue  to  pay  the  high  tax  rate. 


THE  PROPORTIONAL  TAX  35 

Of  the  deserted  villages  and  abandoned  cities, 
how  many  were  due  to  over-taxation  of  the 
land  ?  God  only  knows ! 

Adam  Smith  was  right  when  he  said :  "The 
subjects  of  every  state  ought  to  contribute 
toward  the  support  of  the  government  as  nearly 
as  possible  in  proportion  to  their  respecidve_abil^ 
ities ;  that  is,  in  proportion  to  the  revenue  wHIch 
they  respectively  enjoy  under  the  protection  of 
the  state.  .  .  .  Every  tax  which  falls  only 
upon  rent,  or  only  upon  wages,  or  only  upon 
interest  is  necessarily  unequal." 

This  what  is  called  the  "proportional  tax."  It 
it  has  been  the  goal  in  taxation  for  which  states- 
men have  striven.  It  is  just.  Special  interests 
and  tax-dodgers  may  have  overcome  for  a  time 
that  ideal,  but,  like  any  other  truth,  though 
crushed  to  earth  it  will  rise  again. 

Is  it  not  possible  that  some  advocate  the 
"single  tax"  for  the  sake  of  dodging  their  just 
share  of  the  governmental  support?  All  tax- 
dodgers  are  not  rich  men. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
DANGER  OF  UNTAXED  VOTER. 

Yea,  they  bind  heavy  burdens  and  grievous  to  be  borne,  and 
lay  them  on  men's  shoulders;  but  they  themselves  will  not 
move  them  with  their  finger.  Matthew  xxiii,  4. 

There  is  the  idea  advocated  by  McCulloch 
and  his  followers  who  claim  that  taxes  on 
rent  of  land  are  impolitic  and  unjust,  because 
the  return  received  for  the  natural  and  inherent 
powers  of  the  soil  cannot  be  clearly  distin- 
guished from  the  return  received  from  improve- 
ments and  ameliorations  which  might  thus  be 
discouraged. 

"Where  political  power  is  diffused  it  is  highly 
desirable  that  the  taxation  should  fall  not  on 
one  class,  such  as  land  owners,  but  on  all ;  in 
order  that  all  who  exercise  political  power  may 
feel  a  proper  interest  in  economical  government. 
Taxation  and  representation  cannot  safely  be 
divorced." 

One  of  the  chief  reasons  for  the  extravagance 
and  waste  by  our  city  governments  is  the  fact 
that  a  large  majority  of  the  "city  fathers"  as 
well  as  their  constituents  pay  only  a  poll  tax. 
In  some  States  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  voter 
to  pay  any  tax  as  a  requisite  to  voting.  Is  it  any 


DANGER  OF  UNTAXED  VOTER          37 

wonder  that  the  necessity  for  municipal  econ- 
omy does  not  appeal  to  them? 

Of  course  it  may  be  said  that  the  man  who 
pays  only  a  poll  tax  has  to  pay  for  any  extrav- 
agance of  government  in  increased  rent  and 
higher  cost  of  living.  If  that  were  true,  as  the 
increased  cost  does  not  come  as  a  tax,  he  does 
not  realize  it.  The  higher  cost  of  rent  and  of 
living  may  be  because  certain  combinations, 
called  trusts,  have  put  up  the  price  of  build- 
ing material,  or  of  coal,  or  of  wheat,  or  of  any 
or  all  of  the  necessities  of  life,  and  the  lesser 
evil  of  municipal  extravagance  is  lost  sight  of. 

But  it  is  not  entirely  true.  A  large  portion  of 
municipal  extravagance  assumes  the  form  of  an 
interest-bearing  debt  which  future  generations 
have  to  pay.  We  have  known  of  people  moving 
to  another  town,  where  rents  were  cheaper, 
when  their  voice  and  vote  had  always  been  in 
favor  of  every  extravagance  in  the  town  from 
which  they  moved.  Did  they  pay  for  that  ex- 
travagance? 

But  the  owner  of  land  cannot  escape  an  in- 
crease in  taxes  by  moving.    Nor  can  he  increase  \/  \|  V\ 
his  rents  just  because  taxes  increase.    We  are  n  t  i 
living  in  a  section  of  a  city  in  which  the  taxes 
30  years  ago  were  $14  on  $1000 ;  the  rate  now 
is  $22  on  $1000 ;  and  in  spite  of  this  increase  in 
taxes  there  has  been  a  decrease  in  the  rents. 

"Corn  is  not  high  because  rent  is  paid,  but 
rent  is  paid  because  corn  is  high/'  and  "no  re- 
duction would  take  place  in  the  price  of  corn 
although  landlords  should  forego  the  whole  of 
their  rent." 


38  PROGRESS 

"It  is  not  from  the  produce,  but  from  the  price 
at  which  the  produce  is  sold,  that  the  rent  is 
derived,  and  this  price  is  got  not  because  nature 
assists  in  production,  but  because  it  is  the  price 
which  suits  the  consumption  to  the  supply.  "- 
[Buchanan. 

"Nature  gives  to  labor  alone.  In  a  very  Gar- 
den of  Eden  a  man  would  starve  but  for  human 
exertion." — [Henry  George. 

The  uncivilized  man  may  live  by  land  plus 
labor.    But  for  the  civilized  man  there  is  always 
the    third  factor,  viz:    Capital.    Without  this 
third  factor  (capital)  man  would  be  a  savage. 
The  gun  or  knife  of  the  hunter  means  thou- 
sands of  dollars  capital  employed  in  its  manu- 
facture.   And  capital  must  be  paid,  i.  e.,  it  mus 
share  in  the  product  of  land  plus  labor   plu 
capital. 

"Nature  gives  to  labor  ALONE"  is  not  true^f  \ft\ 
where  any  kind  of  tools  or  machinery  are  used.' 
To  be  just  in  valuing  land  you  must  figure  not 
only  the  value  added  by  labor  but  that  added  by 
capital  (the  tools  and  machinery)  used  to  culti- 
vate the  land. 

"There  is  a  value,  created  and  maintained  by 
the  community,  which  is  justly  called  upon  to 
meet  community  expenses.  Now,  of  what 
values  is  this  true?  Only  of  the  value  of  the 
land."— Ibid. 

Is  it  not  true  of  nearly  all  values?  Of  what 
value  would  a  hill  of  gold  be  to  a  Robinson 
Crusoe?  Far  more  valuable  would  be  one  of 
iron,  for  with  the  iron  (provided  he  had  the 


DANGER  OF  UNTAXED  VOTER          39 

requisite  knowledge  and  skill)  he  could  not  only 
make  tools  to  cultivate  the  soil,  but  also  weap- 
ons to  protect  himself  from  wild  beasts.  So 
gold  derives  its  value  from  the  community ;  so 
do  the  precious  stones;  so  does  nearly  every 
article  known  to  civilized  man.  And  this  added 
value  is  a  selling  value  and  should  therefore  be 
taxed. 

"The  dangerous  classes  politically  are  the  very 
rich  and  the  very  poor.  It  is  not  the  taxes  that 
he  is  conscious  of  paying  that  gives  a  man  a 
stake  in  the  country,  an  interest  in  its  govern- 
ment ;  it  is  the  consciousness  of  feeling  that  he 
is  an  integral  part  of  the  community;  that  its 
prosperity  is  his  prosperity,  and  its  disgrace  his 
shame.  Let  but  the  citizen  feel  this  .  .  . 
and  the  community  may  rely  on  him  even  to 
limb  or  life." — [Henry  George. 

Politically,  the  rich  are  not,  as  a  class,  danger- 
ous, unless  their  property  rights  are  threatened. 
If  a  government  is  true  to  its  original  function 
—that  of  protecting  the  persons  and  the  prop- 
erty of  its  people — it  usually  has  the  support  of 
all  classes.  Of  course  there  are  individual  ex- 
ceptions to  all  rules. 

Economically,  the  very  rich  and  the  very  poor 
are  parasites  on  the  body  politic,  and  they  may 
be  anything  from  an  annoyance  to  a  national 
menace. 

Let  a  man  feel  that  his  person  and  his  property 
are  safe,  and  that  the  government  is  also  work- 
ing for  the  prosperity,  or  protection,  of  its  citi- 
zens, and  it  will  receive  his  loyal  support.  But 
let  him  feel  that  his  property  is  not  safe.  That 


40  PROGRESS. 

any  avaricious  rich  man,  or  corporation,  (wheth- 
er it  be  communal  or  otherwise),  may  dispossess 
him  and  throw  him  into  prison  on  some  fake 
charge,  and  you  have  a  man  that  is  very  near  an 
anarchist.  For  why  should  a  man  be  loyal  to  a 
government  that  does  not  protect  him? 

Some  horses  will  go  if  you  cluck  to  them,  but 
others  require  the  whip,  or  spur.    Some  men 
are  only  aroused  to  an  interest  in  the  affairs  of 
government  by  an  injustice  coming  to  their 
notice.    An  indirect  tax,  because  they  are  not 
conscious  of  paying  it,  does  not  arouse  them,  a « 
while  a  direct  tax  has  caused  many  to  sit  up  *  i 
and  take  notice. 

"There  is  a  definite  and  powerful  interest  op- 
posed to  the  taxation  of  land  values;  but  to  the 
other  taxes  upon  which  modern  governments  so 
largely  rely  there  is  no  special  opposition. — Ibid. 

This  does  not  agree  with  the  reports  of  Con- 
gressmen and  Senators  who  claim  that  whenever 
it  is  necessary  to  revise  the  tariff  they  are  be- 
sieged by  powerful  interests.  So  powerful,  in- 
deed, that  they  have  been  known  to  seat  and 
unseat  members.  Who  has  not  heard  of  the 
whiskey;  or  oil,  or  railroad  ring?  Influences  so 
powerful  that  they  keep  some  of  their  own  mem- 
bers in  Congress  constantly. 

"The  report  of  the  investigation  by  Congress 
in  1893  notes  the  fact  that  on  the  strength  of  a 
rumor  that  the  internal  revenue  tax  was  to  be 
increased  by  Congress,  the  Trust  raised  its 
prices  25  cents  per  gallon.  This  would  amount 
to  a  profit  of  $12,500,000  on  its  yearly  output." 
— [Wealth  vs.  Commonwealth. 


DANGER  OF  UNTAXED  VOTER          41 

By  February,  1888,  all  the  distilleries  (nearly 
eighty)  in  the  Northern  States  were  in  the  trust, 
except  two,  the  larger  of  these  two  being  in 
Chicago.  In  September  of  that  year  it  was  dis- 
covered that  a  valve  in  a  vat  had  been  tampered 
with  in  such  a  way  as  to  have  caused  an  explo- 
sion had  it  not  been  found  in  time  to  prevent  it. 
The  next  month  the  owners  made  known  that 
they  had  been  offered  and  refused  $1,000,000  for 
their  works  by  the  Trust.  In  December  this 
distillery  was  the  scene  of  an  explosion  of  dyna- 
mite. The  buildings  in  the  neighborhood  were 
shaken  and  many  panes  of  glass  broken.  A 
jagged  hole  about  three  feet  square  was  torn  in 
the  roof.  A  package  of  dynamite  which  had 
failed  to  explode,  though  the  fuse  had  been 
lighted,  was  found  on  the  premises  by  the  Chi- 
cago police. 

On  Wednesday,  Feb.  11, 1891,  the  secretary  of 
the  Distillery  Trust  was  arrested  as  he  was  about 
to  enter  the  Grand  Pacific  Hotel  in  Chicago  for 
attempting  to  bribe  a  government  gauger  to 
blow  up  the  competing  distillery. 

If  the  explosion  had  been  carried  out,  150  men 
employed  in  the  distillery  would  have  been  de- 
stroyed. The  gauger  had  been  selected  because 
he  had  access  to  all  parts  of  the  distillery  at  all 
hours,  and  hence  would  have  the  opportunity  to 
do  the  foul  deed  without  being  suspected. 

The  infernal-machine  consisted  of  a  small 
cannon  which  would  shoot  a  sharp-pointed,  coni- 
cal ball  through  the  bottom  of  a  cistern  or  tank 
of  alcohol  or  high  proof  spirits;  this  gun  was 
supplied  with  three  fuses,  one  of  which  would 


42  PROGRESS 

remain  lighted  under  water.  There  was  also  a 
bottle  of  yellow-colored  liquid,  which  when  ex- 
posed to  a  temperature  of  65  degrees  would 
produce  a  flame  caused  by  evaporation.  The 
secretary  of  the  Distillery  Trust  said  this  would, 
"in  three  or  four  hours,  go  off,  and  no  person 
would  know  what  it  was  or  who  did  it,  and  all 
the  trouble  that  has  been  caused  us  will  be 
stopped  at  once,  and  the  sufferings  of  many 
people  stopped,  and  no  loss  to  those  folks,  as 
they  are  well  insured." 

The  chemist  who  testified  before  the  city 
grand  jury  said  (in  the  anteroom  after  he  had 
given  his  testimony)  that  in  his  opinion  it  would 
have  or  might  have  gone  off  in  three  seconds. 
Fire  would  have  caused  the  shooting  of  the  ball, 
and  the  ball  making  a  hole  in  the  tub,  and  alco- 
hol— or  high-proof  spirits — coming  down,  an  ex- 
plosion would  have  followed  at  once,  not  from 
the  machine,  but  from  the  contents  of  the 
cistern. 

All  honor  to  the  gauger,  Mr.  Thomas  S.  De- 
war.  He  was  true  to  his  trust  and  exposed  the 
plot.  By  so  doing  he  saved  his  own  life,  for  if 
the  explosion  had  occurred  within  a  few  seconds, 
when  he  thought  he  had  three  or  four  hours  in 
which  to  get  away,  he  would  surely  have  been 
caught,  and  his  life  would  have  paid  the  penalty. 

June  8,  1891,  the  judge  of  the  United  States 
court  in  Chicago  quashed  the  Federal  indict- 
ment on  the  ground  that  it  is  not  a  crime  under 
any  of  the  United  States  laws  for  an  internal 
revenue  officer  to  set  fire  to  a  distillery  of  his 
own  volition  and  impulse,  and  that  it  is  not  a 


DANGER  OF  UNTAXED  VOTER          43 

crime  against  the  United  States  for  another  per- 
son to  bribe  him  to  do  such  an  act.  He  held 
that  the  offender  could  be  punished  only  through 
the  State  courts. 

The  United  States  had  property  in  this  distill- 
ery to  the  extent  of  $800,000  due  for  taxes, 
which  was  a  legal  lien  on  the  property. 

In  the  State  court  the  case  agaist  the  secre- 
tary of  the  Distillery  Trust  was  postponed  sev- 
eral times,  and  June  24,  1892,  he  was  released 
on  a  nolle  prosequi  entered  by  the  State  Attorney 
because  the  evidence  was  insufficient,  and  be- 
came a  free  man. 

(We  would  refer  to  Wealth  Against  Common- 
wealth for  further  details  of  this  story  and  the 
authorities  there  cited.) 

These  "definite  and  powerful  interests"  (mean- 
ing the  trusts,  the  grafters,  the  non-taxpayer  and 
the  men  and  who  pay  only  a  poll-tax)  have  in- 
creased the  cost  of  living  to  such  an  extent  that 
the  tax  rate  in  many  if  not  most  of  the  cities  are 
50  to  75  per  cent  higher  today  than  they  were 
when  the  civil  war  was  on,  and  the  assessments 
have  also  increased,  100  percent  in  many  in- 
stances, and  the  greater  part  of  this  increase  has 
been  while  we  were  at  peace  with  the  world,  and 
no  famine,  or  serious  internal  trouble. 
*"  It  has  been  said  there  is  a  value  added  to  the 
land  by  the  community,  and  that  value  should 
belong  to  the  community.  How  about  it  if  thei^  N\  ^ 
is  a  decrease  in  land  value?  Is  not  that  thex 
fault  of  the  community?  Should  not  the  com- 
munity make  restitution  to  the  land  owner  for 
the  decrease  in  value,  especially  if  it  is  to  claim 


44  PROGRESS. 

all  the  increase  in  value  as  a  community  asset? 
That  would  be  fair.  But  no;  this  landless  class 
of  single-taxers,  who  imagine  they  give  value  to 
the  land,  the  moment  a  depression  in  business 
or  a  deterioration  in  the  personnel  of  the  com- 
munity comes  (as  by  a  colored  man  moving  into 
the  neighborhood),  they  are  off  to  some  other 
place,  and  the  owner  of  the  land  is  left  to  pay 
the  exorbitant  taxes  caused  by  the  extravagance 
and  graft  of  the  landless,  nontaxpaying  voter,  or 
lose  all  he  has.  Not  a  few  estates  have  been 
sold  for  taxes. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
BASES  OF  TAXATION. 

Masters,  render  unto  your  servants  that  which  is  just  and  equal  ; 
knowing  that  ye  also  have  a  Master  in  heaven.       Colossians  iv,  1. 

Let  us  consider  some  of  the  bases  of  taxation. 

Many  different  interpretations  have  been  put 
to  Smith's  rule  of  taxation.  "The  subjects  of 
every  state  ought  to  contribute  to  the  support 
of  its  government  as  nearly  as  possible  in  pro- 
portion to  their  respective  abilities,"  has  been 
held  to  imply,  first,  thafevery  government  has  a 
right  to  exact  support  from  all  its  subjects.  This 
is  opposed  to  the  American  idea  that  only  those 
who  share  in  the  powers  should  bear  the  bur- 
dens of  government,  or,  "no  taxation  without 
representation."  If  this  latter  opinion  is  strictly 
construed  it  would  follow  that  all  taxes  on  arti- 
cles of  universal  consumption  are  unjust,  except 
in  a  country  where  all  have  the  right  to  vote. 

The  idea  that  all  who  share  in  the  protection 
and  benefits  of  a  country  should  bear  their 
share  in  the  defense  of  the  same  (in  person  as 
well  as  by  taxation)  is  growing  in  the  United 
States.  The  large  number  of  aliens  who  escape 
military  duty  is  the  cause  of  this  change  in 
opinion. 

The  doctrine  of  sovereignty  as  the  basis  of 


46  PROGRESS 

taxation  results  in  the  maxim  that  a  govern- 
ment should  impose  such  taxes  as  are  "most 
easily  assessed  and  collected,  and  are  at  the 
same  time  most  conducive  to  the  public  inter- 
ests" (McCulloch).  As  a  general  looks  to  the 
efficiency  of  his  army  as  a  whole,  and  is  pre- 
pared to  sacrifice  any  portion  of  it,  if  necessary, 
so  the  state  should  not  regard  the  particular 
interests  of  individuals,  but  should  consider  the 
nation  as  a  whole.  But  no  such  ideal  in  any 
nation  has  become  popular  enough  to  render  a 
complete  neglect  of  private  interests  acceptable. 

Second,  the  word  "abilities,"  used  by  Adam 
Smith,  led  to  the  idea  advocated  by  Mill  and 
Fawcett  that  taxes  ought  to  be  levied  so  as  to 
involve  equality  of  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  the 
contributors. 

"Equality  of  taxation  as  a  maxim  of  politics," 
says  Mill,  "means  equality  of  sacrifice.  It  means 
the  apportioning  of  the  contribution  of  each 
person  towards  the  expenses  of  government,  so 
that  he  shall  feel  neither  more  nor  less  incon- 
venience from  his  share  of  the  payment  than 
every  other  person  experiences  from  his."  It  is 
admitted  that  this  cannot  be  realized,  but  it  fur- 
nishes a  basis. 

Third,  Adam  Smith  goes  on  to  say  that  sub- 
jects should  pay  "in  proportion  to  the  revenue 
which  they  respectively  enjoy  under  the  protec- 
tion of  the  state."  This  shows  that  taxes  ought 
to  be  considered  as  payment  for  valuable  services 
rendered  by  the  state  to  individuals.  It  can 
readily  be  seen  that  in  one  sense  the  poor  need 


BASES  OF  TAXATION  47 

protection  more  than  the  rich,  but,  if  stress  is 
laid  on  protection  and  assistance  afforded  by  the 
state  in  the  acquisition  of  individual  fortunes, 
you  obtain  a  view  of  taxation  sometimes  called 
"the  social  dividend  theory." 

It  is  on  this  ground  that  Mill  proposed  that 
the  "unearned  increment"  from  the  land  should 
be  taken  by  the  state,  but  it  has  often  been 
pointed  out  that  "unearned  increments"  are  by 
no  means  confined  to  the  land.  The  state  may 
be  looked  upon  as  a  partner  in  all  industrial  un- 
dertakings and  therefore  entitled  to  share  in  the 
proceeds.  Poor  taxes  and  education  taxes  have 
been  regared  as  an  insurance  paid  by  the  rich 
against  the  poor. 

As  a  fourth  basis  of  taxation  it  has  been  main- 
tained that  the  state  ought  to  use/ its  powers  of 
taxation  for  the  promotion  of  various  social 
ends. 

Adam  Smith  says :  "It  has  for  some  time  past 
been  the  policy  of  Great  Britain  to  discourage 
the  consumption  of  spirituous  liquors,  on  ac- 
count of  their  supposed  tendency  to  ruin  the 
health  and  corrupt  the  morals  of  the  common 
people."  Mill  opposed  the  graduated  income 
tax,  but  favored  the  imposition  of  extremely 
heavy  inheritance  taxes,  with  the  double  object 
of  promoting  a  better  distribution  of  national 
wealth  and  compelling  individuals  to  rely  on 
themselves. 

In  early  times  court  fines  were  an  important 
source  of  revenue.  A  protective  tariff  has  been 


48  PROGRESS 

a  source  of  revenue  always,  to  a  greater  or  less 
extent. 

"In  every  civilized  community  a  complex  sys- 
tem of  taxation  is  adopted. — [Encyc.  Brit. 

Certainty — Adam  Smith  says :  "The  time  of 
payment,  the  manner  of  payment,  the  quantity 
to  be  paid,  ought  all  to  be  clear  and  plain  to  the 
contributor  and  to  every  other  person  [to  prevent 
the  use  of  arbitrary  powers  by  the  tax  gatherer]. 

.  .  .  The  certainty  of  what  each  individual 
ought  to  pay  is  in  taxation  a  matter  of  so  great 
importance  that  a  very  considerable  degree  of 
inequality,  it  appears,  I  believe,  from  the  experi- 
ence of  nations,  is  not  near  so  great  an  evil  as  a 
very  small  degree  of  uncertainty." 

Another  canon  of  taxation  is  convenience. 
"Every  tax  ought  to  be  levied  at  the  time  or  in 
the  manner  to  which  it  is  most  likely  to  be  con- 
venient for  the  contributor  to  pay  it,"  for  it  is 
good  government  to  have  the  tax  paid  in  the 
manner  that  will  be  least  annoying  to  the  payer. 
It  has  been  found  possible  to  raise  large  reve- 
nues by  taxes  on  commodities,  the  payments  of 
which  are  made  in  inconsiderable  sums  by  the 
consumer,  when  it  would  have  been  impossible 
to  collect  the  same  amount  by  direct  taxation  at 
comparatively  long  intervals. 

The  canon  of  economy  states  that  "every  tax 
ought  to  be  so  contrived  as  both  to  take  out  and 
to  keep  out  of  the  pockets  of  the  people  as  little 
as  possible  over  and  above  what  it  brings  into 
the  public  treasury  of  the  state."  Taxes  may 


BASES  OF  TAXATION  49 

break  this  rule  by  requiring  a  large  number  of 
officials  for  their  collection,  by  restraint  of  trade 
and  production,  by  encouraging  smuggling,  and 
by  causing  unnecessary  vexation;  "and,  though 
vexation  is  not,  strictly  speaking,  expense,  it  is 
certainly  equivalent  to  the  expense  at  which 
every  man  would  be  willing  to  redeem  himself 
from  it." 

"To  pretend  to  have  any  scruple  about  buying 
smuggled  goods  would  in  most  countries  be 
regarded  as  one  of  those  pedantic  species  of 
hypocrisy  which  serve  only  to  expose  the  person 
who  affects  to  practice  them  to  the  suspicion  of 
being  a  greater  knave  than  his  neighbors." 

To  these  general  rules  of  taxation  given  by 
Adam  Smith  may  be  added  others :  We  will 
mention  two : 

1.  All  sovereignties,  or  governments,  derive 
their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  gov- 
erned. 

This  does  not  mean  that  every  individual  shall 
have  a  part  in  the  governing.  Many  people  do 
not  care  to  vote.  The  majority  of  women  do 
not,  and  a  large  number  of  men  do  not  care 
enough  about  it  to  register.  Certain  criminals 
and  people  of  unsound  mind  are  debarred  from 
voting.  In  most  countries  children  are  not  sup- 
posed to  have  sufficient  judgment  to  vote. 

But  even  these  need  a  government,  and  the 
more  helpless  they  are  the  more  they  need  it, 
and  there  is  no  just  reason  why  the  weak  ones 


50  PROGRESS 

should  not  contribute  to  the  support  of  the  gov- 
ernment if  they  have  the  ability.  The  weaker 
they  are  the  more  readily  would  they  become 
prey  to  the  unscrupulous  and  predatory. 

There  is,  of  course,  a  good  argument  why 
women  should  be  allowed  to  vote,  and,  we  opine, 
she  will  be  just  as  soon  as  a  majority  of  her  sex 
wishes  it. 

The  unjust  powers  of  government  ought  not 
to  exist.  But  how  those  powers  were  acquired 
and  how  to  obliterate  them  it  is  not  our  purpose 
to  consider  here. 

2.  Governments  were  originally  formed  and 
still  exist  for  the  purpose  of  protection. 

Protection  to  life  and  property  were  among 
the  requirements  of  the  earliest  forms  of  govern- 
ment, but  as  civilization  progressed  protection 
was  demanded  in  thousands  of  directions  not 
dreamed  of  by  primitive  man.  Protection  from 
disease  has  caused  the  enactment  of  sanitary 
laws,  quarantine  laws,  laws  regulating  the 
amount  of  air  space  per  individual  in  sleeping 
room,  and  caused  the  establishment  of  water 
works  and  sewer  systems.  Protection  from 
ignorance  resulted  in  our  school  system.  Grade 
crossings  are  abolished,  life-saving  devices  or- 
dered on  steamships  and  railways  and  building- 
laws  enacted  to  protect  the  people. 

All  these  things  must  be  thought  of  in  consid- 
ering the  matter  of  taxation.  Is  it  any  wonder 
that  taxation  in  a  civilized  community  is  a  com- 
plex affair? 


CHAPTER  X. 
EFFECT  OF  TAXES  ON  PRODUCTION 

In  this  world  nothing  is  certain  but  death  and  taxes. 

Benjamin  Franklin. 

"Until  its  ownership  will  confer  some  advan- 
tage, land  has  no  value." — Henry  George. 

If  this  statement  is  true,  what  does  cause 
the  value  of  land?  Certainly  it  is  not  ownership. 

The  same  might  be  said  of  ownership  of  any- 
thing. The  error  consists  in  thinking  land  is 
different  from  anything  else  in  that  regard. 

The  town  that  takes  over  an  abandoned  farm 
has  not  added  to  its  value  by  so  doing.  Land, 
except  as  it  is  touched  by,  or  comes  in  contact 
with  either  labor  or  capital  has  no  value. 

Are  not  the  higher  rents  in  city  than  in  coun- 
try places  caused  in  part  by  the  difference  in 
taxes ;  including  the  difference  in  valuation  as 
well  as  the  rate? 

Does  not  any  increase  in  taxes  cause  an  at- 
tempt to  be  made  to  shift  that  tax  on  to  some- 
one else  by  an  increase  in  the  price?  Some- 
times the  attempt  is  successful  and  sometimes 
it  is  not. 

"While  the  value  of  a  railroad  or  telegraph 
line,  the  price  of  gas  or  of  a  patent  medicine, 


52  PROGRESS 

may  express  the  price  of  monopoly,  it  also  ex- 
presses the  exertion  of  labor  and  capital;  but 
the  value  of  land,  or  economic  rent,  as  we  have 
seen,  is  in  no  part  made  up  from  these  factors, 
and  expresses  nothing  but  the  advantage  of  ap- 
propriation. " — Ibid. 

Why  should  we  assume  that  the  price  of  gas 
or  a  patent  medicine  expresses  the  exertion  of 
labor  and  capital  and  that  the  price  of  land  does 
not? 

The  farmer  who  drains  his  land,  or  builds  a 
dike,  or  takes  a  sand  lot  and  by  fertilizing  and 
manuring  it  causes  it  to  raise  a  crop,  uses  both 
capital  and  labor,  by  which  he  frequently  makes 
worthless  land  valuable,  and  shall  we  say  that 
the  value  of  such  land  expresses  nothing  but 
the  price  of  monopoly. 

^  "The  whole  value  of  the  land  may  be  taken 
in  taxation,  and  the  only  effect  will  be  to  stimu- 
late industry  to  open  new  opportunities  to  capi- 

\tal,  and  to  increase  the  production  of  wealth." — 

Ylbid. 

The  effect  would  be  that  when  "hard  times" 
came,  caused  by  any  one  of  the  score  of  causes 
previously  enumerated,  as  come  they  will,  sooner 
or  later,  the  city  will  retrograde,  the  shops  and 
tenements  will  become  vacant,  the  taxes  will  be 
increased  to  support  those  out  of  work,  and,  if 
the  cause  of  the  hard  times  should  continue  for 
a  number  of  years  you  would  be  likely  to  have 
another  of  those  "deserted  cities"  for  future 
generations  to  wonder  at. 
The  effect  of  taxation  on  farming  land  is  to 


EFFECT  OF  TAXES  ON  PRODUCTION      53 

decrease  the  value  of  the  land,  and  if  the  land 
is  of  the  kind  that  it  is  barely  possible  for  the 
farmer  to  make  a  living  of  the  standard  to  which 
he  has  been  accustomed,  whether  it  be  from 
lack  of  fertility  or  inaccessibility  to  markets,  it 
is  likely  to  cause  an  abandonment  of  the  farm. 

The  farmer  whose  farm  is  such  that  he  can 
stand  an  increase  in  taxation,  because  it  merely 
affects  his  income,  is  apt  to  search  for  some 
other  business  in  which  the  profits  are  larger, 
and  sell  his  farm  at  a  reduced  price. 
i/The  value  of  ownership  of  land,  or  anything 
else,  depends  in  part  on  the  security  of  posses- 
sion, and  anything  which  affects  that  security 
affects  the  value  of  property,  whether  it  be  war, 
a  defective  title  or  an  uncertain  and  ever  in- 
creasing tax  rate. 

Sydney  Smith  (1820) :  "The  schoolboy  whips 
his  taxed  top ;  the  beardless  youth  manages  his 
taxed  horse,  with  a  taxed  bridle  on  a  taxed  road ; 
and  the  dying  Englishman,  pouring  his  medicine, 
which  has  paid  7  percent,  into  a  spoon  that 
has  paid  15  percent,  flings  himself  back  onto  a 
chintz  bed  which  which  has  paid  22  percent,  and 
expires  in  the  arms  of  an  apothecary  who  has 
paid  £100  for  the  privilege  of  putting  him  to 
death." 

In  so  far  as  taxes  protect  production,  and  en- 
able it  to  progress  in  safety  they  are  a  benefit, 
but  anything  more  than  this  is  an  injury.  The 
people  are  entitled  to  have  their  government 
run  on  as  economical  a  basis  as  is  consistent 
with  efficiency. 


CHAPTER  XL 
LAND. 

And  I  will  give  unto  thee,  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee,  the  land 
of  thy  sojournings,  for  an  everlasting  possession. 

They  shall  dwell  securely  in  their  land,  and  none  shall  make 
them  afraid. 

Is  it  not  lawful  for  me  to  do  what  I  will  with  my  own? 

The  Bible. 

Land,  labor  and  capital  are  the  factors  of  pro- 
duction and  of  progress  according  to  political 
economists.  In  order  that  these  three  factors 
may  cover  the  entire  realm  of  progress  and  pro- 
duction it  is  necessary  to  consider  air  and  water 
as  land  and  food  clothing  and  shelter  as  some- 
belonging  to  one  and  sometimes  to  another  of 
these  factors. 

Of  course  in  order  for  humanity  to  exist  land 
is  necessary,  and  the  question  to  be  solved  is  as 
to  what  is  the  best  method  in  which  to  hold  the 
the  land. 

Of  coure,  also,  food,  clothing  and  shelter  are 
necessary,  but  that  does  not  make  it  right  to 
take  them  from  any  possessor  who  happens  to 
have  them,  simply  because  you  have  the  power 
to  do  so. 

There  is  hardly  any  scheme,  or  system,  of  oc- 
cupation of  the  land  that  has  not  been  tried,  and 
our  present  system  is  the  result  of  experience. 


LAND  55 

Arthur  Young  says :  "The  magic  of  property 
turns  sand  into  gold."  "Give  a  man  the  secure 
possession  of  a  bleak  rock,  and  he  will  turn  it 
into  a  garden ;  give  him  a  nine  years'  lease  of  a 
garden,  and  he  will  convert  it  into  a  desert." 

The  nine-year  lease  was  a  common  form  of 
land  tenure  in  his  day. 

Sismondi  writes:  "What  endowed  man  with 
intelligence  and  perseverance  in  labor,  what 
made  him  direct  all  his  efforts  toward  an  end 
useful  to  his  race,  was  the  sentiment  of  perpe- 
tuity. The  lands  which  the  streams  have  de- 
posited along  their  courses  are  always  the  most 
fertile,  but  are  also  those  which  they  menace 
with  their  inundations  or  corrupt  by  marshes. 
Under  the  guarantee  of  perpetuity  men  under- 
took long  and  painful  labors  to  give  the  marshes 
an  outlet,  to  erect  embankments  against  inunda- 
tions, to  distribute  by  irrigation-channels  fertil- 
izing waters  over  the  same  fields  which  the 
same  waters  had  condemned  to  sterility.  Under 
the  same  guarantee,  man,  no  longer  contenting 
himself  with  the  annual  products  of  the  earth, 
distinguished  among  the  wild  vegetation  the 
perennial  plants,  shrubs  and  trees  which  would 
be  useful  to  him,  improved  them  by  culture, 
changed  it  may  be  almost  said,  their  very  na- 
ture, and  multiplied  their  amount.  .There  are 
fruits  which  require  centuries  of  cultivation  to 
bring  to  their  present  perfection,  and  others 
which  have  been  introduced  from  the  most  re- 
mote regions.  Men  have  opened  the  earth  to  a 
great  depth  to  renew  the  soil,  and  fertilize  it  by 
the  mixture  of  its  parts  and  by  contact  with  the 


56  PROGRESS 

air;  they  have  fixed  on  the  hillsides  the  soil 
which  would  have  slid  off,  and  have  covered  the 
face  of  the  country  with  a  vegetation  every- 
where abundant,  and  everywhere  useful  to  the 
human  race.  Among  their  labors  there  are 
some  which  the  fruits  can  only  be  reaped  at  the 
end  of  ten  or  twenty  years ;  there  are  others  by 
which  their  posterity  will  still  benefit  after  sev- 
eral centuries.  All  have  concurred  in  augment- 
ing the  productive  force  of  nature,  in  giving  to 
mankind  a  revenue  infinitely  more  abundant, 
a  revenue  of  which  a  considerable  part  is  con- 
sumed by  those  who  have  no  share  in  the  owner- 
ship of  the  land,  but  who  would  not  have  found 
a  maintenance  but  for  that  appropriation  of  the 
soil  by  which  they  seem,  at  first  sight,  to  have 
been  disinherited." 

John  Stuart  Mill  writes:  "But  though  land  is 
not  the  produce  of  industry  most  of  its  valuable 
qualities  are  so.  ...  One  of  the  barrenest 
soils  in  the  world,  composed  of  the  material 
of  the  Goodwin  sands,  the  Pays  de  Waes  in 
Flanders,  has  been  so  far  fertilized  by  industry 
as  to  have  become  one  of  the  most  productive 
in  Europe.  Cultivation  requires  buildings  and 
fences,  which  are  wholly  the  produce  of  labor. 
The  fruits  of  this  industry  cannot  be  reaped  in  a 
short  period.  The  labor  and  outlay  are  imme- 
diate, the  benefit  is  spread  over  many  years,  per- 
haps over  all  future  time.  A  holder  will  not 
incur  this  labor  and  outlay  when  strangers  and 
not  himself  will  be  benefited  by  it.  If  he  under- 
takes such  improvements,  he  must  have  a  suffi- 
cient period  before  him  in  which  to  profit  by 


LAND  57 

them ;  and  he  is  in  no  way  so  sure  of  having 
always  a  sufficient  period  as  when  his  tenure  is 
perpetual." 

Mill,  in  speaking  of  peasant  proprietors  in 
Flanders,  says  that  a  man,  his  wife  and  three 
children,  a  cow  and  a  hog  can  live  on  the 
produce  of  two  and  one-half  acres  of  land,  and, 
and  if  he  has  a  six-acre  place,  the  produce  of 
three  and  one-half  acres  may  be  sold  to  pay  rent, 
or  interest  on  purchase  money,  wear  and  tear 
of  implements,  extra  manure,  and  clothes  for 
the  family.  With  15  acres  and  the  addition  of  a 
man  and  a  woman  to  the  family,  and  a  horse 
and  cart,  a  farmer  may  live,  bring  up  a  family, 
pay  a  good  rent  and  accumulate  a  considerable 
sum  in  the  course  of  a  lifetime.  "But  the  inde- 
fatigable industry  by  which  he  accomplishes 
this,  and  of  which  so  large  a  portion  is  expend- 
ed, not  in  the  mere  cultivation,  but  in  improve- 
ment, for  a  distant  return,  of  the  soil  itself — has 
that  industry  no  connection  with  NOT  paying 
rent?  Could  it  exist,  without  presupposing,  at 
least,  a  virtually  permanent  tenure?" 

According  to  the  World  Almanac  there  are 
29.5  persons  per  square  mile  on  this  earth.  Of 
the  57,255,000  square  miles  the  "fertile  regions" 
contain  only  about  29,000,000  square  miles ;  the 
other  28,000,000  square  miles  being  divided  be- 
tween deserts,  steppes,  the  polar  regions  and 
inland  lakes  and  rivers.  This  would  make  58 
persons  per  square  mile  for  the  fertile  regions 
to  support. 

As  it  requires  about  two  square  miles  to  sup- 


58  PROGRESS 

port  one  hunter  it  is  plain  that  the  human  fam- 
ily is  forced  to  agriculture  if  it  would  live. 

Massachusetts  has  a  population  of  480  per 
square  mile,  and  the  (continental)  United  States 
28.4;  while  England  in  1911  had  618;  Scotland, 
156.5;  and  Ireland,  135.6. 

The  figures  not  only  show  the  necessity  of 
cultivating  the  land  but  of  cultivating  it  in 
the  most  efficient  manner,  and,  judging  by 
the  past,  the  land  has  produced  more  when 
privately  owned  than  under  any  other  system  of 
tenure. 

Of  course,  in  farming,  as  in  any  other  busi- 
ness, there  is  an  advantage  when  the  proprietor 
is  a  practical  man  and  superintends  his  farm 
personally.  How  shall  we  prevent  a  man  from 
doing  what  he  will  with  his  own  ?  Can  we  lay 
any  claim  to  justice  if  we  do? 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  custom  and  not 
competition  often  fixes  the  rent  and  the  tenure 
of  land.  In  some  sections  the  tenant  can  sell 
his  tenancy  for  quite  a  substantial  sum,  and  yet 
legally  he  is  only  a  tenant-at-will.  And  the  right 
of  the  heirs  to  inherit  the  tenancy  is  also  recog- 
nized. 

Sometimes  sentiment  rather  than  competition 
fixes  the  value  of  the  land.  Many  a  man  con- 
tinues to  own  land,  because  he  inherited  it,  when 
it  is  not  worth  the  taxes. 

Sentiment  fixes  the  value  of  many  things  and 
its  power  is  recognized  in  regard  to  other  things, 
why  not  in  regard  to  land  ?  A  man  may  be 
offered  a  big  price  for  his  business,  by  some 


LAND  59 

corporation  that  wishes  to  form  a  monopoly,  but 
he  refuses  to  sell.  Years  of  work  and  habit  has 
endeared  that  business  to  him  and  he  does  not 
wish  to  sell  at  any  price. 

Land  probably  will  continue  to  be  bought 
and  sold  as  private  property,  because,  consider- 
ing all  things,  it  is  the  nearest  approach  possible 
to  what  is  right  in  dealing  with  the  problem. 

Tis  heaven  alone  that  is  given  away 
Tis  only  God  may  be  had  for  the  asking. 

James  Russell  Lowell. 


.CHAPTER  XIL 
LABOR 

Laborin'  man  an*  laborin'  woman 

Hev  one  glory  and  one  shame; 
Evty  thin'  that's  done  inhuman 

Injures  all  on  'em  the  same. 

James  Russell  Lowell. 

Labor  is  one  the  factors  of  production  and  of 
progress  and  is  divided,  perhaps  somewhat  arbi- 
trarily, by  economists  into  productive  and  un- 
productive labor. 

Productive  labor  produces  utilities  which  are 
embodied  in  material  objects,  as  a  horseshoe,  or 
the  iron  from  which  the  horseshoe  is  made. 

Unproductive  labor  embraces  other  kinds, 
such  as  the  footman  in  livery  whose  labor  is  for 
ostentation  and  show. 

There  is  such  a  thing  as  productive  and  un- 
productive consumption.  The  food  and  clothing 
consumed  by  the  insane  is  an  instance  of  unpro- 
ductive consumption,  while  that  consumed  by 
the  farmer  is  productive  consumption. 

Labor  is  employed  either  directly  about  the 
thing  produced  or  in  operations  preparatory  to 
its  production,  as  labor  employed  in  producing 
subsistence  for  subsequent  labor,  in  producing 
materials  or  implements,  in  the  protection  of 


LABOR  61 

labor,  in  the  transportation  and  distribution  of 
produce,  in  invention  and  discovery,  in  agricul- 
ture, manufacturing  and  commerce,  as  well  as 
labor  which  relates  to  human  beings,  as  teach- 
ing, doctoring,  nursing,  etc. 

The  tendency  of  competition  is  to  reduce  the 
recompense  of  labor  to  the  smallest  amount  that 
will  sustain  life,  or  to  a  bare  existence. 

It  is  fortunate  for  the  average  laborer  that 
there  are  several  things  that  tend  to  regulate 
the  price  of  labor  besides  competition. 

One  of  these  is  the  ratio  between  the  amount 
of  money  available  for  wages  and  the  number 
of  laborers. 

This  ratio  is  subject  to  changes  caused  (1)  by 
an  increase  in  number  of  laborers,  (2)  by  a  de- 
crease in  number  of  laborers,  (3)  by  an  increase 
in  amount  of  money,  (4)  by  a  decrease  in  the 
amount  of  money,  (5)  by  improved  machinery 
or  methods,  which  have  the  same  effect  as  an 
increase  in  number  of  laborers. 

Custom  in  many  instances  fixes  the  price  of 
labor,  and  in  such  cases  competition  has  little 
effect.  Fishermen  fish  "on  shares,"  and  the 
price  of  fish  is  supposed  to  be  governed  by  sup- 
ply and  demand.  The  expose  of  some  of  the 
combinations  of  wholesale  fish  dealers  has  led 
us  to  doubt  whether  supply  has  much  to  do 
with  regulating  the  price  of  fish ;  and  demand  is 
governed  more  by  religious  ideas  than  anything 
else.  If  it  is  not  so,  why  is  Friday  looked  upon 
as  the  day  for  eating  fish  more  than  any  other 
day? 


62  PROGRESS 

Access  to  the  means  of  production  tends  to 
prevent  competition  from  reducing  the  price  of 
labor.  This  is  particularly  true  of  the  fishing 
industry.  Several  year  ago  we  heard  a  Cape 
Cod  farmer  complaining  that  he  had  to  pay  $2 
per  day  for  laborers,  while  farmers  in  the  mid- 
dle and  western  parts  of  the  State  could  hire 
help  for  $20  a  month  and  board.  When  asked 
why,  he  said : 

"Well,  you  see,  the  men  go  clamming.  At  low 
tide  they  can  get  enough  clams  to  sell  for  $1  or 
$1.25,  and  as  there  are  two  tides  a  day  that  ena- 
bles them  to  earn  $2  or  $.50  per  day." 

This  condition  is  somewhat  changed  today. 
Owing  to  the  great  probability  that  the  sup- 
ply of  clams  would  become  exhausted,  laws 
were  passed  protecting  people  who  planted 
clams ;  and  the  towns  have  been  obliged  to  pass 
laws  to  prevent  any  but  citizens  from  digging 
clams,  and  also,  in  some  instances,  limiting  the 
amount  which  each  individual  would  be  allowed 
to  dig.  Neverthelees,  if  a  man  would  take  the 
precaution  which  the  savage  does,  of  keeping  a 
boat,  he  could  fish  as  much  as  he  wished. 

An  inflation  of  the  currency,  or  an  increase 
in  the  circulating  medium  usually  causes  an 
increase  in  wages,  in  name,  at  least,  if  not  in  re- 
ality. '144JE  v 

The  advance  in  the  cost  of  necessities  owing 
to  the  European  war  has  caused  a  demand  on 
the  part  of  labor  for  an  increase  in  pay,  which 
has  generally  been  granted,  and  yet,  in  spite  of 
this  increase  in  pay,  as  expressed  in  the  necessi- 


LABOR  63 

ties  or  comforts  of  life,  the  real  wages  of  labor 
are  not  as  large  as  they  were  before  the  war. 

This  nominal  advance  in  the  price  of  labor 
and  real  advance  in  the  cost  of  living  may  be 
attributed  to  the  large  number  of  men  taken  for 
war  purposes  from  the  ranks  of  labor,  but  this 
can  have  affected  it  only  in  a  limited  degree. 
The  larger  portion  of  this  boom  in  prices  occur- 
red before  the  United  States  was  a  participant 
in  the  war  and  may  have  continued  to  even 
higher  levels  had  we  remained  neutral. 

The  new  births  in  the  country  more  than 
offset  the  men  called  to  war.  In  order  for  the 
population  to  double  in  25  years,  as  it  has  in  the 
past,  there  must  be  an  addition  of  over  five- 
and-a-half  million  persons  every  year.  About 
one-half  of  these  are  males. 

Number  of  births  per  year  necesssry 
for  a  population  of  102,826,309  to 
double  in  25  years,  if  there  were 
neither  immigration  nor  death  .  .  .  4,113,052 

Births  necessary  to  make  up  for 
deaths,  per  year  (13.5  per  1000)  .  .  1,388,155 

5,501,207 
Less  gain  by  immigration  per  year  .  .    746,361 

Births  necessary  to  double  population .  4,754,846 

The  World's  Almanac  gives  the  death  rate  of 
the  United  States  as  13.5  per  1000,  and  the 
number  of  immigrants  for  the  five  years,  1910  to 
1914  inclusive,  as  5,174,701,  and  the  number  of 
alien  emigrants  for  the  same  period  as  1,442,892. 


64  PROGRESS 

Thus  we  have  in  continental  United  States 
an  increase  in  births  of  nearly  2,500,000  males, 
and  if  the  Philippines  and  other  insular  posses- 
sions we  taken  into  consideration  it  would 
amount  to  more  than  that. 

If  we  were  to  have  2,000,000  men  in  the  Army 
and  Navy  the  casualties  would  hardly  reach  25 
percent,  or  500,000,  which  is  only  one-fifth  of 
the  males  born  each  year. 

It  would  appear  that  the  increase  in  the  cost 
of  living  is  not  due  to  a  diminution  of  men, 
but  to  some  other  cause. 

The  nations  at  war  are  going  in  debt,  and 
spending  money  lavishly;  the  stress  will  come 
when  payment  of  these  vast  debts  have  to  be 
made. 

So  far  as  the  war  was  necessary  for  the  pro- 
tection of  labor,  labor  should  bear  its  share  of 
the  expense.  But  capital  has  been  protected  as 
well  as  labor,  and,  unless  great  care  is  taken, 
capital  will  shift  its  share  of  the  burden  so  that 
labor  and  land  will  bear  it  all. 

Henry  George  says:  "If  I  take  a  piece  of 
leather  and  work  it  up  into  a  pair  of  shoes,  the 
shoes  are  my  wages — the  reward  of  my  exer- 
tion. Surely  they  are  not  drawn  from  capital — 
either  my  capital  or  any  one  else's  capital." 

If  capital  is  "stored-up  labor"  then  leather  is 
capital  as  it  requires  weeks  to  make  it,  and  it  is 
capital  i.  e.,  stored-up  labor,  whether  one  makes 
it  himself  and  earns  his  living  while  making  it 
by  some  other  labor,  as  fishing,  or  whether  he 
buys  it  with  money,  and  the  food  and  clothing 


LABOR  65 

which  he  eats  and  wears  while  making  the  shoes 
are  either  his  own  stored-up  labor  (capital),  or 
the  stored-up  labor  of  someone  else. 

There  is  no  doubt  but  what  labor  produces 
wages  and  capital,  but  labor  produces  practi- 
cally nothing  without  the  aid  of  previous  labor 
which  must  have  been  stored-up  to  be  in  exist- 
ence. 

"The  people  of  a  country  are  maintained  and 
have  their  wants  supplied,  not  by  the  produce 
of  present  labor,  but  of  past."— John  Stuart  Mill. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 
CAPITAL 

But  thou  shalt  remember  Jehovah,  thy,  God,  for  it  is  He  that 
giveth  thee  the  power  to  get  wealth.  Deut.  viii,  18. 

Most  writers  on  political  economy  have  de- 
voted considerable  space  to  the  definition  of 
words  or  terms,  oftentimes  giving  them  a  much 
more  limited  meaning  than  they  have  in  ordi- 
nary use.  Also,  most  writers  have  forgotten  the 
limited  meaning  which  they  gave  to  the  words 
and  have  used  them  in  a  different  or  wider  sense 
before  they  have  finished  their  works. 

"Capital  is  but  stored-up  labor,"  says  Henry 
George.  That  definition  seems  best  because  it 
is  brief,  and  it  embraces  most  of  the  other  defi- 
nitions. 

"The  capital  of  a  nation  really  comprises  all 
those  portions  of  the  produce  of  industry  exist- 
ing in  it  that  may  be  directly  employed  either  to 
support  human  existence  or  to  facilitate  produc- 
tion. "— McCulloch. 

"Capital  is  that  part  of  the  wealth  of  a 
country  which  is  employed  in  production,  and 
consists  of  food,  clothing,  tools,  raw  mate- 
rials, machinery,  etc.,  necessary  to  give  effect  to 
labor." — Ricardo. 


CAPITAL  67 

"That  part  of  a  man's  stock  which  he  expects 
to  afford  him  a  revenue,  is  called  capital,"  says 
Adam  Smith,  and  he  makes  some  fine  distinc- 
tions as  to  when  certain  things  are  capital  and 
when  they  are  not.  Food  if  a  man  has  it  to  sell 
is  capital,  but  if  he  has  it  to  eat  it  is  not  capital. 
Coal  if  a  man  uses  it  to  run  his  engine  in  his 
shop  is  capital,  if  he  uses  it  to  cook  his  dinner  it 
is  not  capital,  according  to  Adam  Smith. 

Is  not  the  food  that  a  man  eats,  in  order  that 
he  may  perform  his  day's  work,  capital,  as  much 
as  the  coal  which  he  burns  in  his  engine  that  he 
may  perform  his  day's  work?  Are  they  not 
both  the  product  of  previous  labor,  or  stored-up 
labor  ? 

Karl  Marx  devotes  two  large  quarto  volumes 
to  telling  what  "Capital"  is  and  is  not. 

"Whatever  things  are  destined  to  supply  pro- 
ductive labor  with  shelter,  protection,  tools  and 
materials  which  the  work  requires,  and  to  feed 
and  otherwise  maintain  the  laborer  during  the 
process,  are  capital." — John  Stuart  Mill. 

"The  word  capital  is  used  in  two  senses.  In 
relation  to  product  it  means  any  substance  on 
which  industry  is  to  be  exerted.  In  relation  to 
industry,  the  material  on  which  industry  is  about 
to  confer  value,  that  on  which  it  has  conferred 
value ;  the  instruments  which  are  used  for  the 
conferring  of  value,  as  well  as  the  means  of 
sustenance  by  which  the  being  is  supported 
while  he  is  engaged  in  performing  the  opera- 
tion."—Prof.  Wayland. 

Henry  C.  Carey  says  capital  "is  the  instru- 


68  PROGRESS 

ment  by  which  man  obtains  mastery  over  nature, 
including  in  it  the  physical  and  mental  powers 
of  man  himself." 

Prof.  Perry  defines  capital  as  "any  valuable 
thing  outside  of  man  himself  from  whose  use 
springs  a  pecuniary  increase  or  profit." 

William  Thornton,  an  English  economic  writer, 
says  ("On  Labor")  that  he  would  include  land 
with  capital.  Prof.  Francis  A.  Walker,  an  Amer- 
ican writer,  makes  the  same  declaration  in  his 
work  on  "The  Wages  Question." 

N.  A.  Nicholson,  London,  1873,  says:  "Capital 
must  of  course  be  accumulated  by  saving,"  and 
"the  land  which  produces  a  crop,  the  plow  which 
turns  the  soil,  the  labor  which  secures  the 
produce,  and  the  produce  itself,  if  a  material 
profit  is  to  be  derived  from  its  employment,  are 
all  alike  capital." 

Henry  George  cannot  understand  how  "land 
and  labor  are  to  be  accumulated  by  saving." 

Mr.  A.  having  saved  the  product  of  his  labor, 
i.  e.,  saved  his  labor,  for  years,  with  that  sayed- 
up,  or  stored-up  labor  (money)  he  buys  a  piece 
of  land.  He  has  accumulated  the  land  just  as 
surely  as  he  has  accumulated  the  money. 

If  a  man  were  to  say,  "I  made  $5  yesterday," 
no  one  with  a  modicum  of  sense  would  think 
that  he  meant  that  he  manufactured  a  $5  gold 
piece  out  of  crude  gold,  or  that  he  printed  a  $5 
bill.  The  man  who  saves  his  "wages"  saves  his 
labor — not  in  the  sense  of  sparing  his  labor,  but 
in  the  sense  of  hoarding  it. 

"The  gold  washed  out  by  the  self-employing 


CAPITAL  69 

gold  digger  is  as  much  his  wages  as  the  money 
paid  to  the  hired  coal  miner  by  the  purchaser  of 
his  labor,"  says  Henry  George.  It  is  also  his 
saved  labor,  or  stored  labor,  or  capital.  If  not, 
why  not? 

Prof.  Amasa  Walker  says  capital  arises  from 
the  net  savings  of  labor,  and  then  afterward 
declares  that  land  is  capital. 

By  excluding  wealth,  all  natural  resources, 
mines,  waterfalls,  water,  bank  bills  and  all  forms 
of  money  (except  coin)  from  his  definition  of 
capital,  Henry  George  tries  to  make  out  a  case. 
But  it  amounts  to  "words,  words." 

As  well  define  heaven  as  a  place  of  darkness 
and  sin,  or  hell  as  a  place  of  happiness  where 
there  is  no  night,  and  on  such  definitions  build 
an  argument. 

Having  considered  the  various  definitions  of 
capital  it  appears  that  "stored-up  labor"  is  as 
good  a  one  as  can  be  found,  whether  it  be  in  the 
shape  of  knowledge,  or  gold,  or  houses,  or  land, 
or  cattle,  or  sheep,  or  any  of  the  forms  of 
wealth.  It  is  a  pretty  fine  distinction  to  say 
that  whether  a  thing  is  capital  or  not  depends 
on  the  use  to  which  the  owner  intends  to  put 
that  thing — whether  to  use  it  himself  or  to  sell 
it — because  it  not  unfrequently  happens  that  a 
man  does  not  know  what  use  he  will  make  of  a 
thing. 

A  certain  man,  named  Jacob,  made  for  him- 
self a  savory  "pottage,"  or  "pot  roast,"  and, 
when  it  was  all  ready  to  be  served,  his  brother 
arrived  at  the  camp  all  tired  out  from  a  long 


70  PROGRESS 

hunting  trip,  and  the  brother  was  faint.  This 
brother's  name  was  Esau. 

"And  Esau  said  to  Jacob,  Teed  me,  I  pray 
thee,  with  that  same  red  pottage;  for  I  am 
faint.'  .  .  . 

"And  Jacob  said,  'Sell  me  first  thy  birthright/ 

"And  Esau  said,  'Behold  I  am  about  to  die ; 
and  what  profit  shall  the  birthright  do  to  me?' 

"And  Jacob  said,  'Swear  to  me  first ;  and  he 
swore  unto  him ;  and  he  sold  his  birthright  unto 
Jacob.  And  Jacob  gave  Esau  bread  and  pottage 
of  lentils ;  and  he  did  eat  and  drink,  and  he  rose 
up  and  went  his  way." 

Now  Jacob  prepared  the  pottage  for  himself, 
but  he  saw  a  chance  to  make  a  good  trade  and 
he  sold  it.  According  to  some  writers  the  pot- 
tage was  not  capital  until  his  brother  came  into 
camp  and  asked  for  the  pottage,  and  then  it  sud- 
denly became  capital.  It  was  "stored-up  labor" 
from  the  raising  of  the  animal  to  the  killing, 
dressing  and  cooking  of  it,  and  did  not  have  to 
do  any  lightning-change  trick  at  the  last  moment 
to  become  capital. 

That  the  laborer  may  and  usually  does  use 
capital,  even  when  working  for  himself,  is  a  fact 
that  many  writers  overlook,  or,  if  they  mention 
it,  they  proceed  with  illustrations  and  argu- 
ments in  which  that  fact  is  ignored.  A  naked 
man  may  pick  wild  berries  and  eat  them,  but,  if 
he  is  to  sell  the  berries,  he  must  first  manufac- 
ture baskets  to  carry  them  in,  even  though  they 
are  birch-bark  ones,  and  both  the  berries  and 
the  baskets  are  "stored-up  labor."  And  these 
baskets  could  scarcely  be  called  "wages,"  unless 


CAPITAL  71 

we  consider  wages  and  capital  one;  they  are  his 
capital  by  means  of  which  he  expects  to  market 
the  product  of  his  labor. 

The  savage  who  uses  a  steel  knife,  hatchet  or 
gun  is  using  that  which  requires  thousands  of 
dollars  capital.  There  is  nothing  which  civilized 
man  uses  for  food,  clothing  or  shelter,  or  arts, 
literature  or  amusement  that  does  not  require 
capital  as  well  as  labor.  It  is  not  good  logic  to 
say  labor  creates  capital  and  therefore  can  get 
along  without  it.  If  the  products  of  labor  and 
"wages"  are  to  be  spoken  of  as  one,  then  capital, 
wealth,  profit,  interest,  wages,  etc.,  are  all  one, 
and  philosophy  becomes  merely  words,  words. 

The  civilized  man  must  have  capital  in  some 
shape  in  order  to  labor,  and  while  labor  may 
precede  capital  in  the  case  of  the  nude  savage, 
even  with  him  capital  is  more  often  used  than 
not. 

"Many  months  must  elapse  between  the  sow- 
ing of  the  seed  and  the  time  when  the  produce 
of  that  seed  is  converted  into  a  loaf  of  bread," 
and  "it  is  therefore  evident  that  laborers  cannot 
live  upon  that  which  their  labor  is  assisting  to 
produce,  but  are  maintained  by  that  wealth 
which  their  labor,  or  the  labor  of  others,  has 
previously  produced,  which  wealth  is  capital." — 
[Fawcett. 

Henry  George  says :  "These  propositions  are 
seen  to  be  not  self-evident,  but  absurd ;  for  they 
involve  the  idea  that  labor  cannot  be  exerted 
until  the  products  of  labor  are  saved — thus  put- 
ting the  product  before  the  producer." 

With  the  civilized  laborer  is  it  not  invariably 


72  PROGRESS 

the  case  that  another's  labor  must  precede  our 
own?  We  labor  by  means  of  the  product  of 
some  other  man's  labor. 

Take  the  printer,  for  instance,  he  goes  to  the 
office  (a  building  made  by  other  men's  labor), 
sets  type  (made  by  other  men),  he  takes  a  proof 
using  roller,  ink,  paper  and  press  (made  by 
others),  he  reads,  corrects,  imposes  and  prints 
(with  materials  made  by  others),  and,  if  it  is  a 
book  he  is  working  on,  it  has  to  go  to  the  binder, 
thence  to  the  publishers,  thence  to  the  book- 
stores, and  it  would  be  months  before  any 
money  would  be  derived  from  his  labor  or  its 
product,  unless  someone  with  capital  advanced 
him  his  wages. 

"The  canoe  which  Robinson  Crusoe  made  with 
infinite  pains  was  a  production  in  which  his 
labor  could  not  yield  an  immediate  return. 
.  .  .  It  was  necessary  only  that  he  should 
devote  part  of  his  time  to  the  procurement  of 
food  while  he  was  devoting  part  of  his  time  to 
the  building  and  launching  of  the  canoe." — 
[Henry  George. 

Is  it  not  plain  the  the  canoe  became  Crusoe's 
capital,  or  stored-up  labor,  as  soon  as  he  com- 
menced to  build  it,  and  the  nearer  it  approached 
completion  the  greater  was  his  capital  (stored-up 
labor). 

The  nude  savage  may  gather  wild  fruits  and 
eat  them,  and  thus  have  no  capital,  but  if  he 
makes  a  bow  and  arrow,  or  any  other  weapon, 
to  kill  game  with,  he  thereby  stores  up  labor  and 
has  capital  in  the  bow  and  arrow. 


CAPITAL  73 

Does  subsistence  come  from  the  past  or  from 
productive  labor  that  is  going  on  around  us? 
asks  Henry  George. 

The  greater  portion  of  present  production  ex- 
ists because  of  past  labor.  Years  of  labor  were 
required  to  build  the  boats,  nets  and  equipment 
with  which  to  catch  the  fresh  fish  on  the  break- 
fast table ;  at  least  one  year's  labor  was  required 
to  raise  the  cow  from  which  the  fresh  milk  was 
obtained;  fresh  vegetables  were  planted  and 
labored  on  months  before  they  were  put  on  the 
table ;  while  the  orchard  from  which  the  fresh 
fruit  is  obtained  must  have  been  planted  from 
two  to  seven  years  before  it  bore  anything. 

Daily  labor  supplies  daily  bread  only  because 
it  makes  use  of  the  stored-up  labor  (capital)  of 
the  past.  The  rich  man  might,  because  of  his 
capital,  have  his  food  placed  on  his  table,  and  by 
refusing  to  eat  might  die  of  starvation.  The 
labor  of  feeding  himself  would  hardly  be  called 
earning  his  daily  bread  by  daily  labor,  and  yet 
that  may  be  the  only  labor  which  he  performs. 

Nearly  all  taxes,  in  this  country,  at  least,  are 
collected  in  the  shape  of  money,  and  money  is 
capital ;  money  never  exists  until  labor  has  been 
expended,  and  it  represents  stored-up  labor.  If 
one  should  say  money  is  not  capital,  the  error 
would  be  in  the  definition  of  money.  Calling 
black  white  does  not  make  it  so.  But  a  single- 
taxer  does  not  stop  at  a  little  thing  like  that. 

H.  Besser  in  his  book  thus  describes  such  a 
person : 

"A  very  frequent  form  of  obstinacy  is  that 
which  is  familiarly  known  as  the  'fixed  idea/ 


74  PROGRESS 

that  is  to  say  the  persistence  of  a  single  idea 
that  has  become  so  exaggerated  that  it  finally 
developes  into  an  obsession  from  which  nothing 
can  turn  those  who  have  fallen  victims  to  it. 
.  .  .  Pushed  to  its  limit  the  'fixed  idea'  be- 
comes a  monomania.  This  state  of  mind  has 
the  essential  characteristic  of  causing  every 
occurrence,  whatever  its  nature  may  happen  to 
be,  to  take  on  the  color  of  the  dominant  thought 
that  one  cultivates  so  sedulously.  Things  which, 
at  first  glance,  seem  to  be  absolutely  incompati- 
ble with  this  point  of  view,  and  quite  at  variance 
with  the  obsession  in  question,  always  become  a 
part  of  it  in  the  end.  They  become  bound  to  it 
by  threads  more  or  less  slender,  but  which,  after 
a  thousand  twists  and  turns,  ultimately  attach 
themselves  fast  to  it,  thus  effecting  a  heteroge- 
neous jumble  of  ideas  in  which  the  victim  of  the 
obsession  will  always  manage  in  some  myste- 
rious way  to  find  a  point  of  contact." 


CHAPTER  XIV. 
THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  CAPITAL 

"Know  from  a  bounteous  heaven  all  riches  flow."         Pope. 

We  are  so  accustomed  to  breathing  that  we 
do  it  unconsciously ;  we  are  also  so  accustomed 
to  using  capital  (stored-up  labor)  that  we  do  it 
unconsciously. 

Capital,  therefore,  increases  the  power  labor  to 
produce  wealth : 

1.  "By  enabling  labor  to  apply  itself  in  more 
effective  ways,  as  by  digging  up  clams  with  a 
spade  instead  of  the  hand,  or  by  moving  a  vessel 
by  shovelling  coal  into  a  furnace  instead  of 
tugging  at  an  oar." — [Henry  George. 

[Furnishing  the  clam-digger  with  a  spade  is 
increasing  the  power  of  labor  to  produce  wealth, 
but  moving  a  vessel  (capital)  by  shoveling  coal 
(more  capital)  into  a  furnace  (also  capital)  in- 
stead of  tugging  at  an  oar  (capital),  is  not  so 
much  increasing  the  power  of  labor  as  it  is  in- 
creasing the  efficiency  of  capital.  It  must  be 
remembered  that  capital,  unless  used  efficiently, 
wastes  itself.  The  primitive  man  who  wished 
to  navigate  a  stream  (without  capital)  would 
have  selected  a  drifting  tree  and  propelled  it  by 
paddling  with  his  hands,  or  with  a  broken 


76  PROGRESS 

branch  of  the  tree.  The  oar  was  as  much  cap- 
ital in  the  foregoing  illustration  as  was  the 
spade,  yet  the  author  did  not  seem  to  appreciate 
the  fact.] 

2.  By  assisting  labor  to  avail  itself  of  the  re- 
productive forces  of  nature,  as  to  obtain  pototoes 
by  planting  them,  or  cattle  by  breeding  them. 

3.  By  permitting  the  division  of  labor,  and 
thus  increasing  the  efficiency  of   the  human 
being  by  the  utilization  of  special  capabilities, 
the  acquisition  of  skill,  and  the  reduction  of 
waste ;  and  also  by  using  the  powers  of  nature 
at  their  best,  by  taking  advantage  of  the  diversi- 
ties of  soil,  climate  and  situation,  so  as  to  obtain 
each  particular  kind  of  wealth  where  nature 
is  most  favorable  to  its  production. 

4.  By  paying  wages  and  supporting  labor  dur- 
ing production. 

5.  By  supplying  materials  which  labor  works 
up  into  wealth. 

6.  By  supplying  machinery  and  tools,  build- 
ings, factories,  stores,  houses  and  land  to  the 
laborers. 

7.  By  supplying  transportation. 

8.  By  supplying  money  and   means  of  ex- 
change. 

9.  Lack  of  capital,  and  the  inefficient  use  of 
capital,  limits  industry. 

There  is  no  dispute  as  to  the  second  and 
third  propositions  stated  above ;  they  are  self- 
evident  ;  so  we  will  pass  to  the  fourth.  It  is  only 
by  putting  a  limited  and  false  meaning  to  the 
word  "capital"  that  any  ambiguity  arises,  and 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  CAPITAL  77 

we  have  previously  quoted  the  authorities  on 
this  subject. 

If  you  bear  in  mind  that  "stored-up  labor"  is 
capital,  can  there  be  any  doubt  that  the  civilized 
man  lives  and  eats  because  of  capital? 

It  has  been  said  in  regard  to  the  fifth  proposi- 
tion that  nature,  rather  than  capital,  supplies 
materials  which  are  made  up  into  wealth  by 
labor.  This  may  be  true,  in  some  few  instances, 
with  the  savage  man,  but  with  the  civilized  man 
nature  yields  her  materials  only  to  labor  when 
assisted  by  capital. 

Sixth.  It  is  admitted  (Progress  and  Poverty, 
p.  80)  that  capital,  or  the  lack  of  it,  may  limit 
the  "form"  and  the  "productiveness"  of  labor. 
Without  the  factory  there  could  be  no  factory 
operatives.  If  the  farmer  must  use  a  stick,  be- 
cause he  has  not  capital  enough  for  a  spade  or 
a  horse  and  plow,  there  is  a  great  limitation  put 
on  the  productiveness  of  his  labor. 

Do  you  not  limit  labor  when  you  limit  its  form 
and  productiveness?  Can  you  think  of  a  single 
instance  in  which  the  civilized  man  exerts  his 
labor  power  and  reaps  the  product  of  that  labor, 
without  the  use  of  capital? 

Physical  exercise,  or  calisthenics,  is  the  only 
labor  I  know  which  yields  its  product  without 
the  use  of  capital,  and  a  man  would  starve  if  his 
labor  were  limited  to  that. 

Seventh.  That  capital  by  supplying  trans- 
portation aids  labor  is  so  patent  that  it  needs 
scarcely  be  stated. 

Think  of  the  labor  of  bringing  copper  from 


78  PROGRESS 

Lake  Superior  to  New  York  or  Boston,  if  it  had 
to  be  packed  on  the  backs  of  men. 

Eighth.  It  seems  self-evident  that  capital  sup- 
plies money  and  the  means  of  exchange.  Even 
though  credit  is  a  large  factor  in  banking  and 
exchange,  credit  could  not  long  exist  without 
capital. 

Ninth.  As  the  power  of  labor  to  produce 
wealth  is  increased  by  capital  in  the  aforemen- 
tioned ways,  so  the  lack  of  capital  and  its  ineffi- 
cient use  limit  the  power  of  labor  to  produce 
wealth.  This  limit  is  not  necessarily  an  absolute 
stoppage  of  labor.  "Limited  liability"  does  not 
mean  no  liabitity. 

"A  portion  of  wealth  production  is  constantly 
going  to  the  replacement  of  capital,  which  is 
constantly  consumed  and  constantly  replaced. 
But  it  is  not  necessary  to  take  this  into  account, 
as  it  is  eliminated  by  considering  capital  as  con- 
tinuous."— [Henry  George. 

The  annual  increase  of  wealth  is  estimated  to 
be  from  3  to  7  percent  only.  The  wealth  of  the 
United  States  in  1900  was  $88,517,303,775 ;  in 
1912  it  was  $187,739,071,090;  an  increase  of  less 
than  7  percent.  The  other  93  percent  must 
have  gone  for  (1)  what  was  consumed  in  produc- 
tion and  (2)  the  replacement  of  capital. 

To  "eliminate"  consideration  of  97  percent  of 
production  and  remember  only  the  7  percent  is 
rather  absurd,  and  yet  that  is  what  you  do  if  you 
consider  capital  continuous. 

"When  we  speak  of  produce,  we  mean  there- 
fore, that  part  of  the  wealth  produced  above 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  CAPITAL  79 

what  is  necessary  to  replace  the  capital  con- 
sumed in  production." — Ibid. 

The  product  of  a  farm  or  a  factory  is  its  gross 
output,  regardless  of  whether  the  capital  is  re- 
placed or  not.  Profit  is  the  word  generally  used 
to  denote  the  gain  over  and  above  that  necessary 
to  replace  capital.  When  we  say  of  a  certain 
shoe  factory  that  its  "production  is  ten  cases  of 
shoes  per  day,"  no  man  would  think  we  meant 
that  there  were  that  many  cases  "above  what  is 
necessary  to  replace  the  capital  consumed  in 
production." 

"Some  portion  of  the  produce  is  taken  in  tax- 
ation and  consumed  by  government.  But  it  is 
not  necessary,  in  seeking  the  laws  of  distribu- 
tion, to  take  this  into  consideration." — Ibid. 

Not  considering  the  produce  taken  by  the  gov- 
ernment and  the  transportation  problem  and  the 
calls  upon  capital  to  settle  these  matters  resulted 
in  the  coal  and  sugar  famine  in  New  England  in 
1917-18,  and  caused  the  banks  to  call  in  their 
loans  and  boost  the  rate  of  interest. 

Single-tax  writers  claim  that  the  whole  social 
fabric  is  dependent  up  three  factors — land,  labor 
and  capital — and  that  all  social  wrongs  are  be- 
cause of  the  inequitable  division  of  production 
between  these  three  factors. 

A  certain  rich  Arab  was  making  his  way 
across  the  desert  of  Sahara,  as  it  was  a  business 
trip  his  belt  was  well  supplied  with  precious 
stones  and  gold ;  when  in  the  midst  of  the  desert 
his  camel  sickened  and  died.  The  land  as  far 
as  he  could  see  was  his  to  use  as  he  would ;  he 
had  plenty  of  capital,  and  his  labor  power  was 


80  PROGRESS 

unimpared,  for  he  was  in  his  prime.  Land,  labor 
and  capital  were  his,  and  yet  death  stared  him 
in  the  face,  unless  some  caravan  should  chance 
his  way. 

A  Robinson  Crusoe  might  have  a  cave  of  gold, 
more  land  than  he  could  possibly  use,  and  be  as 
strong  as  Samson,  or,  in  other  words,  have  land 
labor  and  capital,  and  yet  be  nothing  but  a  mis- 
erable castaway,  like  a  bird  fretting  his  life  away 
in  gilded  cage. 

You  never  saw  a  watch  or  a  clock  with  only 
three  wheels,  and  yet  single-tax  writers  think 
the  weal  or  woe  of  the  whole  social  fabric  is  de- 
pendent on  the  three  wheels — land,  labor  and 
capital. 

For  a  community  to  be  successful  it  must 
have  not  land  alone,  but  land  containing  many 
and  diversified  elements,  or  those  elements  must 
be  readily  obtainable.  Of  course  farm  lands  are 
necessary,  but  what  would  farm  lands  avail  with- 
out the  plow,  mowing  machine,  harrow,  etc.?  And 
how  shall  we  obtain  these  without  iron?  If  you 
consider  all  these  as  land,  the  question  becomes 
one  of  transportation  for  the  necessary  elements 
are  seldom  if  ever  to  be  found  in  one  locality, 
and  to  furnish  transportation  is  one  of  the 
functions  of  capital. 

Also  for  a  community  to  be  progressive  it 
must  not  only  have  labor,  but  it  also  must  have 
labor  skilled  in  the  various  arts  and  crafts.  It 
must  not  only  have  capital,  but  it  must  also  have 
it  in  the  shape  and  form  most  readily  adaptable 
to  the  multiple  uses  of  a  modern  civilization. 

It  must  also  have  men  of  educution  and  to 


THE  FUNCTIONS  OF  CAPITAL          81 

obtain  these  schools  and  colleges  are  necessary, 
furnishing  which  is  also  a  function  of  capital. 

And  last,  but  by  no  means  least,  that  country 
that  would  spell  success  must  have  God-fearing 
justice-loving,  right-living  men,  and  these  to  a 
great  extent  depend  on  the  religious  training, 
which  training,  in  modern  days  at  least,  requires 
capital. 

The  present  world  war  is  because  the  Kaiser 
and  the  junkers  who  rule  the  German  Empire 
had  neglected  the  Biblical  teaching  of  love, 
which  "suffereth  long  and  is  kind ;  love  envieth 
not ;  love  vaunteth  not  itself,  is  not  puffed  up, 
doth  not  behave  itself  unseemly,  seeketh  not  its 
own,  is  not  provoked."  They  were  puffed  up 
with  pride,  which  "goeth  before  a  fall;"  they 
were  envious  of  Great  Britain  and  France  and 
claimed  not  only  their  own  but  everything  in 
sight. 

"Labor  exerted  upon  the  land  can  produce 
wealth  without  the  aid  of  capital,  .  .  .  there- 
fore the  law  of  rent  and  the  law  of  wages  must 
correlate  each  other  and  form  a  perfect  whole 
without  reference  to  the  law  of  capital,  as  other- 
wise these  laws  would  not  fit  the  cases  ...  in 
which  capital  takes  no  part  in  production."  "As 
capital  is  but  stored-up  labor  ...  its  laws 
must  be  subordinate  to,  and  independently  cor- 
relate with,  the  law  of  wages,  so  as  to  fit  cases 
in  which  the  whole  produce  is  divided  between 
labor  and  capital  without  any  deduction  for 
rent." — [Progress  and  Poverty. 

These  quotations  show  the  fallacy  of  the  three 
factors,  for  this  author  admits  that  there  are 


82  PROGRESS 

times  when  but  two  factors  are  used  and  not 
always  the  same  two  factors  at  that. 

Furthermore,  with  primitive  man,  labor  pre- 
ceded both  wages  and  capital,  and  with  civilized 
man,  labor  usually  precedes  wages;  very  few 
persons  receive  their  pay  in  advance,  that  being 
the  case,  how  can  the  law  of  labor  (whether 
stored-up  or  otherwise)  be  subordinate  to  the 
law  of  wages?  Labor  and  capital  can  both  exist 
without  wages,  and,  quite  often  do  so  exist,  as 
where  the  small  farmer  owns  and  operates  his 
farm. 


CHAPTER  XV. 
RENT,  AND  ITS  LAW 

The  land  is  to  be  let  for  life  or  years, 
The  rent  paid  in  money,  produce  or  tears. 

We  ordinarily  speak  of  rent  only  when  the 
owner  and  user  are  distinct  persons.  But  there 
is  also  rent  where  the  owner  and  user  are  the 
same  person.  Whatever  part  of  an  income  an 
owner  might  obtain  by  letting  his  land  to 
another  is  rent.  Because  it  represents  (or  is) 
the  interest  which  he  might  obtain  had  he  put 
his  money  in  the  bank  instead  of  investing  it  in 
land. 

If  a  man  buys  a  piece  of  land  at  a  low  price 
and  after  a  lapse  of  time  sells  it  at  a  much 
higher  price,  whether  he  has  made  or  lost 
money  depends  upon  whether  he  has  received 
enough  rent  to  pay  the  taxes,  plus  the  amount 
of  interest  he  would  have  received  had  his 
money  been  in  the  bank,  plus  the  amount  of 
money  necessary  to  pay  for  the  care  and  collec- 
tion of  rents.  Many  a  man  has  sold  land  at  a 
much  higher  price  than  he  gave  for  it  and  yet 
lost  money,  owing  to  taxes  and  loss  of  interest. 


84  PROGRESS 

"Until  its  ownership  will  confer  some  advan- 
tage, land  has  no  value." — [Henry  George. 

Rent  or  land  value  arises  from  (1)  productive- 
ness, and  (2)  accessibility  to  markets. 

Two  farms  of  equal  size  and  equidistant  from 
market  may  be  of  unequal  value,  because  one 
will  produce  six  or  eight  times  as  much  as  the 
other ;  and  that  productiveness  may  be  the  re- 
sult of  labor  which  one  owner  had  been  expend- 
ing for  years  on  the  land,  while  the  other  owner 
was  shiftless. 

And  is  not  this  productiveness,  which  has 
been  added  to  the  land,  capital,  and  entitled  to 
its  interest  indefinitely,  the  same  as  any  other 
capital  ?  And  how  can  this  interest  be  separated 
from  rent? 

Ricardo's  law  of  rent  is : 

"The  rent  of  land  is  determined  by  the  excess 
of  its  produce  over  that  which  the  same  applica- 
tion can  secure  from  the  least  productive  land 


in  use." 


"Rent  is  in  short  the  price  of  monopoly  .  .  . 
but,  in  the  modern  form  of  society,  the  land, 
though  generally  reduced  to  individual  owner- 
ship, is  in  the  hands  of  too  many  different  per- 
sons to  permit  the  price  which  can  be  obtained 
for  its  use  to  be  fixed  by  mere  caprice  or  de- 
sire."— [Henry  George. 

If  the  last  part  of  this  statement  is  true,  how 
can  there  be  a  monopoly? 

There  are  hundreds  of  farms  in  New  England 
that  can  be  bought  for  less  than  the  cost  of  the 
buildings,  and  many  city  properties,  also.  That 


RENT,  AND  ITS  LAW  85 

being  the  case,  how  can  there  be  a  monopoly  of 
land? 

"In  speaking  of  the  value  of  land  I  use  and 
shall  use  the  words  as  referring  to  the  value  of 
the  bare  land.  When  I  wish  to  speak  of  the 
land  and  improvements  I  shall  use  those  words." 
—Ibid. 

But  how  can  you  separate  those  values? 

A.  bought  a  house  and  lot  for  $3100 ;  the  asses- 
sors say  the  house  and  lot  are  worth  $4000 ;  a 
reputable  builder  says  the  house  could  not  be 
built  for  $4000.  What  becomes  of  the  value  of 
the  land?  What  is  the  value  of  the  house? 

The  value  of  a  thing  is  what  it  will  sell  for. 
This  is  well  known  in  the  stock  market.  The 
man  who  values  his  stock  above  the  market 
price  is  trying  to  fool  himself.  This  does  not 
mean  that  he  must  sell  at  the  market  price. 

A  man  buys  two  pounds  of  sugar  for  20c. 
He  may  not  wish  to  sell  it,  but  you  would  be 
foolish  to  pay  more  when  you  can  go  to  the 
store  and  buy  it  for  20c.  So  20c  is  the  value  of 
that  sugar,  whether  he  sells  it  or  not. 

There  are  hundreds  of  farms  in  New  England 
that  can  be  bought  for  less  than  the  cost  of 
the  buildings,  and  many  city  properties  also. 
That  being  the  case  how  can  there  be  a  monop- 
oly of  land?  You  pay  for  the  buildings  and  you 
get  the  land  for  nothing,  and  how  can  there  be 
a  monopoly  of  what  you  can  get  for  nothing? 

Single-taxers  would  divide  produce  into :  Rent 
plus  wages  plus  interest.  Why?  They  omit 
the  most  important  factor — taxes.  Taxes  have, 


86  PROGRESS 

in  the  history  of  the  world,  frequently  been  so 
high  and  levied  so  ruthlessly,  as  to  leave  the 
producers  to  starve. 

The  single-taxer  may  tell  you  that  taxes  are 
included  in  the  rent ;  but  so  frequently  are  inter- 
v  /est,  wages,  heat  and  gas. 
V      There  are  cases  every  year  in  which  land 
passes  to  the  government — city  or  town— be- 
cause people  cannot  pay  the  taxes. 

If  Ricardo's  law  of  rent  is  true,  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  "least  productive  land  in  use"  is 
a  stationary  point.  It  varies  from  year  to  year, 
owing  to  a  number  of  reasons. 

One  of  the  chief  reasons  why  there  are  aban- 
doned farms  is  not  because  the  soil  is  less  pro- 
ductive than  it  was  one  hundred  years  ago,  but 
because  the  railroads  have  made  the  products  of 
other  farms,  which  are  more  distant  from  the 
market,  more  accessible. 

There  were  no  railroads  when  these  aban- 
doned farms  were  first  reclaimed  from  the  wil- 
derness. The  first  railroad  in  the  United  States 
was  built  in  1828-30.  In  1830  there  were  40 
miles  of  railroad  in  the  United  States. 

You  will  find,  if  you  take  the  trouble  to  in- 
vestigate, that  the  abandoned  farms  are  all  three 
or  more  miles  from  a  railroad  station. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 
INTEREST 

Interest  speaks  all  sorts  of    tongues,  and  plays  all  sorts  of 
parts,  even  that  of  disinterestedness. 

Francis,  Due  De  La  Rochefoucauld. 

In  a  state  of  society  in  which  the  monetary 
system,  and  hence  all  business,  is  on  an  interest 
basis  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  avoid  interest. 

A  man  in  business  is  obliged  to  charge  inter- 
est or  he  wonld  be  forced  out  of  business.  It 
may  be  called  by  some  other  name  as  profit  or 
rent. 

A  builder  borrows  money  to  build  a  house. 
If  he  lets  the  house  for  hire,  he  must  receive 
enough  money  to  pay  for  the  taxes,  the  wear  and 
tear  of  the  property,  the  interest  on  the  money 
borrowed  as  well  as  interest  on  his  profit  (or  on 
the  selling  price  of  the  house);  in  this  case  the 
interest  would  be  called  "rent."  If  he  sold  the 
house  the  interest  might  be  called  "profit." 

The  following  quotations  will  show  what  the 
Biblical  writers  thought  of  interest : 

"If  thou  lend  money  to  any  of  my  people  with 
thee  that  is  poor,  thou  shalt  not  be  to  him  as  a 
creditor;  neither  shall  ye  lay  upon  him  inter- 
est."— [Exodus  xxii,  25. 

"Take  thou  no  interest  of  him  [thy  brother] 


88  PROGRESS 

or  increase,  but  fear  thy  God,  that  thy  brother 
may  live  with  thee.  Thou  shalt  not  give  him 
thy  money  upon  interest  nor  give  him  thy 
victuals  for  increase."— [Leviticus  xxv,  36,  37. 

"Thou  shalt  not  lend  upon  interest  to  thy 
brother ;  interest  of  money  interest  of  victuals, 
interest  of  anything  that  is  lent  upon  interest : 
unto  a  foreigner  thou  mayest  lend  upon  interest ; 
but  unto  thy  brother  thou  shall  not  lend  upon 
interest." — [Deuteronomy  xxiii,  19, 20. 

"Ye  exact  usury,  every  one  of  his  brother. 
.  .  .  The  thing  that  ye  do  is  not  good.  .  .  . 
And  I  likewise,  my  brethren  and  my  servants, 
do  lend  them  money  and  grain.  I  pray  you,  let 
us  leave  off  this  usury. — [Nehemiah  v,  7-10. 

"Jehovah,  who  shall  sojourn  in  thy  tabernacle? 
Who  shall  dwell  in  thy  holy  hill?  ...  He 
that  putteth  not  out  his  money  to  interest,  nor 
taketh  reward  against  the  innocent." — [Psalms 
xv,  1,  5. 

"He  that  augmenteth  his  substance  by  interest 
and  increase,  gathereth  it  for  him  that  hath  pity 
on  the  poor." — [Proverbs  xxviii,  8. 

"As  with  the  taker  of  interest,  so  with  the 
giver  of  interest  to  him.  The  earth  shall  be 
utterly  emptied,  and  utterly  laid  waste;  for  Jeho- 
vah hath  spoken  this  word." — [Isaiah  xxiv,  2, 3. 

"Woe  is  me,  my  mother,  that  thou  hast  borne 
me  a  man  of  strife  and  a  man  of  contention  to 
the  whole  earth !  I  have  not  lent,  neither  have 
men  lent  to  me;  yet  every  one  of  them  doth 
curse  me." — [Jeremiah  xv,  10. 

"He  that  hath  not  given  forth  upon  interest, 
neither  hath  taken  any  increase,  that  hath  with- 


INTEREST  89 

drawn  his  hand  from  iniquity,  hath  executed 
true  justice  between  man  and  man,  hath  walked 
in  my  statutes,  and  hath  kept  mine  ordinances, 
to  deal  truly ;  he  is  just,  he  shall  surely  live,  saith 
the  Lord  Jehovah." — Ezekiel  xviii,  8. 

"Now,  lo,  if  he  beget  a  son,  that  seeth  all  his 
father's  sins,  which  he  hath  done,  and  feareth, 
and  doeth  not  such  like ;  .  .  .  that  hath  with- 
drawn his  hand  from  the  poor,  that  hath  not 
received  interest  nor  increase,  hath  executed 
mine  ordinances,  hath  walked  in  my  statutes,  he 
shall  not  die  for  the  iniquity  of  the  father,  he 
shall  surely  live." — [Ezekiel  xviii,  14. 

"If  he  beget  a  son  that  is  a  robber,  a  shedder 
of  blood,  and  that  doeth  any  one  of  these  things, 
.  .  .  hath  given  forth  upon  interest,  and  hath 
taken  increase,  shall  he  then  live?  He  shall  not 
live :  he  hath  done  all  these  abominations ;  he 
shall  surely  die;  his  blood  shall  be  upon  him."— 
[Ezekiel  xviii,  10,  13. 

"In  thee  (Jerusalem)  have  they  taken  bribes 
to  shed  blood ;  thou  hast  taken  interest  and  in- 
crease, and  thou  hast  greedily  gained  of  thy 
neighbors  by  oppression,  and  hast  forgotten  me, 
saith  the  Lord  Jehovah." — [Ezekiel  xxii,  12. 

"Thou  oughtest  therefore  to  have  put  my 
money  to  the  bankers,  and  at  my  coming  I 
should  have  received  back  my  own  with  inter- 
est."—[Matthew  xxv,  27. 

"Then  wherefore  gavest  thou  not  my  money 
into  the  bank,  and  I  at  my  coming  should  have 
required  it  with  interest?" — Luke  xix,  23. 

The  only  places  in  the  Bible  where  interest  is 
spoken  of  as  anything  but  evil  are  in  the  two  last 


90  PROGRESS 

quotations.  In  these  parables  Christ  made  use 
of  the  well-known  custom  of  giving  and  taking 
interest  to  illustrate  the  truth  that  "God  giveth 
the  increase,"  and  hence  the  increase  belongs  to 
God,  and  we  should  do  nothing  to  hinder  God 
from  giving  his  natural  increase.  In  other 
words  we  should  not  be  stumbling-blocks. 

There  are  a  number  of  things  which  tend  to 
fix  the  current  rate  of  interest.  Perhaps  the 
most  important  is  the  government's  financial 
system. 

If  a  government  borrows  money,  as  most 
civilized  governments  do,  the  rate  of  interest 
which  she  pays  becomes  the  minimum  rate  of 
interest  in  that  country. 

When  the  United  States  paid  7  3-10  percent, 
as  she  did  during  the  civil  war,  that  was  the 
minimum  rate,  and  most  loans  were  for  10  or  12 
percent. 

When  the  United  States  paid  3  percent,  4 
to  6  percent  was  the  prevailing  rate  of  interest. 
When  the  United  States  issued  her  Liberty  loans 
at  3  1-2  and  4  percent,  the  savings  banks  noti- 
fied the  borrowers  that  the  interest  rate  would 
be  one-half  of  one  percent  higher,  and  they  also 
began  to  call  in  their  loans. 

The  reason  why  the  government's  loans  al- 
ways command  the  lowest  rate  of  interest  is  be- 
cause they  are  the  very  best  securities.  The 
right  of  a  government  to  take  everything  and 
everybody  in  a  country,  when  necessary  for  the 
defense  of  that  country,  necessarily  makes  the 


INTEREST  91 

promises  of  that  government  superior  to  the 
promises  of  any  of  her  subjects. 

Then,  of  course,  supply  and  demand  and 
security  have  their  influence  in  fixing  the  rate 
of  interest.  For,  while  the  government  estab- 
lishes the  minimum  rate,  in  periods  when  the 
government  rate  is  stationary  there  are  varia- 
tions in  the  rate  of  interest  which  the  ordinary 
borrower  must  pay. 

If  interest,  in  itself,  is  a  curse ;  and  a  great 
many  sacred  and  profane  writers  seem  to  think 
that  it  is,  why  would  it  not  be  a  good  thing  if 
the  government  should  establish  zero  as  the 
minimum  interest  rate?  Why  should  the  gov- 
ernment pay  any  interest? 

Why  should  not  the  government  issues  its 
bills  and  pay  them  directly  to  whomsoever  it  may 
happen  to  owe,  whether  it  be  the  soldier  or  the 
United  States  Senator  or  the  contractor? 

And,  to  prevent  depreciation  of  the  currency, 
why  should  not  the  annual  tax  levy  be  sufficient 
to  meet  the  annual  expenses  ? 

Is  not  a  bill  issued  by  the  government  of  the 
United  States  as  good  as  one  issued  by  any  bank 
or  combination  of  banks?  What  if  the  bank 
bill  does  have  a  government  bond  (another  kind 
of  bill)  or  a  railroad  security  back  of  it,  does 
make  it  any  better  than  a  bill  issued  by  the 
United  States  government,  without  using  the 
banks  as  an  intermediary  ? 

There  is  what  is  known  as  a  quitclaim  deed, 
and  if  a  piece  of  real  estate  were  sold  a  dozen 
times,  each  seller  giving  a  quitclaim  deed,  and 


92  PROGRESS 

it  should  develop  that  the  first  seller  had  no 
valid  title,  the  last  buyer  would  be  the  loser,  for 
each  seller  had  simply  quit  whatever  claim  he 
might  have  had  in  the  estate. 

Is  it  not  thus  with  the  United  States  govern- 
ment's promise  to  pay?  Does  passing  through 
the  hands  of  one  bank  or  a  dozen  banks  increase 
its  value? 

If  in  the  present  war  the  United  States  should 
be  whipped  and  government  bonds  become 
worthless,  do  you  think  the  banks  would  re- 
deem their  bills  in  gold? 

The  setting  forth  the  principles  of  money  and 
credit  would  take  more  space  than  was  intended 
when  this  book  was  contemplated,  and  the  rate 
of  interest  is  of  course  affected  by  these. 

"Money  is  a  representative  of  value"  is  one 
of  the  best  definitions  that  we  have  read.  If 
that  is  correct  why  is  not  the  the  cheapest  and 
most  convenient  kind  of  "representative"  the 
best? 

Is  this  not  the  reason  why  bank  checks  are 
used  more  than  any  other  form  of  money? 

Gold  is  said  to  represent  the  value  of  the  labor 
which  is  required,  on  the  average,  to  produce  it. 

Why  should  the  government  fix  the  value  of 
the  average  price  of  gold?  Why  should  the 
government  not  fix  the  average  prices  of  the  rep- 
resentatives of  other  forms  of  labor,  as  iron, 
copper,  wheat,  corn,  potatoes,  sugar,  etc? 

If  it  is  a  good  thing  for  the  government  to 
issue  a  paper  representative  of  one  kind  of  labor, 
why  not  of  other  kinds  of  labor  ? 

Of  course  to  maintain  the  value  of  these  rep- 


INTEREST  93 

resentatives  there  must  always  be  value  back  of 
them.  When  the  government  issues  paper  rep- 
resentatives of  labor  (in  place  of  silver,  or  gold) 
it  stores  the  thing  represented,  and  when  the 
thing  represented  is  taken  out  of  storage  its  rep- 
resentative is  retired  from  circulation. 

To  carry  out  this  idea  on  many  commodities 
it  would  be  necessary  for  the  government  to 
have  storage  warehouses,  but  it  would  not  be 
necessary  for  the  producer  to  pay  interest  on 
the  produce  while  it  was  being  stored,  his  "rep- 
resentative of  value"  would  be  "ready  money." 

The  currency  thus  issued  would  be  an  elastic 
currency,  retiring  from  circulation  automatically 
when  the  commodity  is  withdrawn  from  the 
government  warehouse  for  consumption. 

It  is  for  benefit  of  the  bankers  that  we  have  a 
monetary  system  founded  on  an  interest-bearing 
debt.  Whenever  this  matter  has  been  up  for 
discussion  the  bankers  of  the  country  have  had 
influence  enough  to  down  it.  Are  they  not  the 
financiers  of  the  country?  Is  it  not  presump- 
tion for  a  layman  to  assume  to  know  anything 
about  finance? 

There  is  no  prospect  that  we  shall  have  any 
such  change  in  the  financial  system  as  we  have 
here  indicated,  and  it  is  mentioned  merely  be- 
cause we  should  be  false  to  our  light  if  we  did 
not. 


CHAPTER  XVH. 
WAGES 

For  the  Scripture  saith,  Thou  shalt  not  muzzle  the  ox  when 
he  treadeth  out  the  corn.  And,  the  laborer  is  worthy  of  his 
hire.  I  Timothy  v,  18 

Men  seek  to  gratify  their  desires  with  the 
least  exertion.  That  they  work  at  all  is  simply 
because  they  cannot  gratify  their  desires  with- 
out work. 

The  "Wages  Question,"  by  Prof  Walker,  de- 
fines wages  as  "the  reward  of  those  who  are 
employed  in  production  with  a  view  to  the  profit 
of  their  employers  and  are  paid  at  stipulated 
rates." 

It  has  been  said  that  "the  reward  for  labor"  is 
too  broad  a  definition,  as  it  would  apply  to  the 
the  capitalist  whose  only  work  is  to  scheme  to 
make  money ;  or  to  the  gambler  who  studies  to 
swindle ;  it  includes  labor  of  mind  as  well  as  of 
hands. 

We  must  confess  that  we  do  not  sense  any  of 
these  objections.  There  are  some  kinds  of  work 
that  are  no  benefit  to  mankind  and  some  that 
are  injurious,  but  "the  wages  of  sin  is  death," 
and  the  "reward  for  labor"  is  its  wage.  The 
Chinaman  laboring  in  the  cultivation  of  the 


WAGES  95 

poppy,  and  extracting  and  marketing  the  opium, 
may  be  doing  a  greater  injury  to  mankind  than 
than  the  robber,  but  who  would  say  that  the  pit- 
tance he  receives  is  not  his  wage? 

The  lawyer  or  doctor  may  give  you  advice 
for  which  he  receives  a  "fee,"  is  not  that  fee  a 
reward  for  the  years  of  work  as  a  student?  If 
so,  why  is  it  not  a  wage  ? 

Wages  "include  all  returns  received  from 
labor"  and  vary  with  the  differing  powers  of  the 
individuals,  and  also,  as  society  becomes  more 
complex,  vary  largely  as  between  occupations. 

Wages  are  measured  (1)  by  the  amount  of 
money  earned  in  a  certain  time,  and  (2)  by  the 
amount  of  money  obtained  for  a  given  amount 
of  work  of  a  given  quality.  One  is  spoken  of  as 
"time  work"  and  the  other  "piece  work."  This 
is  a  rough  way  of  measuring,  but  in  many  in- 
stances it  is  sufficient. 

In  comparing  wages  of  different  places  and 
even  the  same  place  at  different  times  it  is  nec- 
essary to  consider  the  difference  between  "nom- 
inal" and  "real"  wages. 

A  nominal  wage  is  the  amount  of  money  re- 
ceived per  hour,  day,  week,  month,  year,  or 
"piece,"  as  the  case  may  be. 

Real  wages  are  affected  (1)  by  variations  in  the 
purchasing  power  of  money;  (2)  by  varieties  in 
form  of  payment ;  (3)  by  opportunities  for  extra 
earnings;  (4)  by  regularity  of  employment; 
(5)  by  the  longer  or  shorter  duration  of  the 
power  to  labor ;  (6)  by  causes  which  change  the 
rate  of  wages  in  any  country  at  any  time. 

The  actual  rate  of  wages  depends  partly  on 


96  PROGRESS 

causes  affecting  one  group  of  employments  com- 
pared with  others,  and  partly  on  the  general 
conditions  which  determine  the  relations  be- 
tween labor,  capital  and  production  over  the 
whole  area  in  which  the  industrial  competition 
is  effective. 
This  theory  gives  rise  to  two  questions : 

1.  What  are  the  causes  which  determine  the 
general  rate  of  wages? 

2.  Why  are  wages  in  some  occupations  and  at 
some  times  and  places  above  or  below  this  gen- 
eral rate? 

Natural  causes  which  determine  the  rate  of 
wages  are : 

1.  The  agreeableness  or  disagreeableness  of 
the  employment. 

2.  The  cheapness  or  the  reverse  of  learning 
the  business. 

3.  The  constancy  or  inconstancy  of  employ- 
ment (also  mentioned  as  affecting  real  wages). 

4.  The  great  or  small  trust  reposed  in  the 
workmen,  an  important  consideration  in  the 
higher  grades  of  labor  as  doctors,  lawyers,  etc. 

5.  The  chance  of  success  or  the  reverse. 
Mankind  in  general  is  inclined  to  overestimate 

the  chances  of  success.  The  fact  that  95  per- 
cent of  new  business  ventures  are  failures  proves 
this. 

Artificial  causes  which  determine  the  rate  of 
wages : 

1.  Industrial  competion  restrained  by  limiting 
the  number  of  any  particular  group.  Many 
labor  unions  limit  the  number  of  apprentices, 


WAGES  97 

thus  restricting  the  number  of  those  who  can 
learn  the  business. 

2.  Competition  increased  or   diminished  by 
law  and  custom.    Free  education  tends  to  in- 
crease competition  in  those  pursuits  requiring 
education,    while    educational    qualification    in 
many  instances  tends  to  limit  competition,  es- 
pecially where  the  education  required  is  not  free 
and  is  technical,  as  doctors,  lawyers,  engineers, 
firemen,  plumbers,  etc.    In  many  states  the  law 
requires  anyone  desiring  to  practice  one  of  these 
avocations  to  pass  a  rigid  examination. 

3.  Law  or  custom  may  impede  or  promote  the 
circulation  of  labor.    England  once  had  laws 
which  prevented  a  laboring  man  from  moving 
from  one  town  to  anothor. 

4.  Many  times  in  the  history  of  the  past  the 
laws  have  directly  interfered  to  regulate  wages. 
And  those  regulations  have  usually  been  against 
the  working  man. 

Between  1796  and  1834  in  England  the  giving 
of  relief  in  aid  of  wages  to  able-bodied  persons 
outside  of  the  poorhouses  was  legal,  according 
Fowle's  "Poor  Law."  The  justices  determined 
a  natural  rate  of  wages,  regard  being  paid  to 
the  price  of  necessaries  and  the  size  of  the  labor- 
er's family,  and  an  amount  was  given  from  the 
taxes  sufficient  to  make  up  the  wages  received 
to  this  natural  level. 

In  one  parish  the  poor-tax  swallowed  up  the 
whole  value  of  the  land  (thus  nationalizing  it), 
which  was  fast  going  out  of  cultivation.  (The 
usual  result  of  public  ownership.)  The  real 


98  PROGRESS 

wages  obtained  were,  in  spite  of  this  relief, 
lower  than  otherwise  they  would  have  been, 
proving  that  wages  are  paid  out  of  the  produce 
of  labor. 

The  report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners 
(1834)  states :  "The  severest  sufferers  are  those 
for  whose  benefit  the  system  is  supposed  to  have 
been  introduced  and  to  be  perpetuated,  the 
laborers  and  their  families."  In  every  district 
the  general  condition  of  the  independent  laborer 
was  strikingly  distinguishable  from  and  superior 
to  that  of  the  pauper,  though  the  independent 
laborers  were  commonly  maintained  upon  less 
money. 

What  has  been  called  the  "wages-fund"  theory 
also  is  entitled  to  some  consideration  in  deciding 
what  determines  the  rate  of  wages : 

The  ratio  between  the  aggregate  amount  of 
money  at  a  given  time  which  is  destined  for  the 
payment  of  wages  and  the  number  of  laborers 
among  whom  this  money  is  to  be  divided.  Any 
increase  in  population  would  cause  a  diminution 
in  the  rate  of  wages,  unless  there  were  a  corre- 
sponding increase  in  the  wages  fund;  any  in- 
crease in  the  wages  fund  would  cause  a  rise  in 
wages. 

According  to  this  view  wages  can  only  rise 
either  owing  to  an  increase  in  capital  or  a  de- 
crease in  population,  and  this  accounts  for  the 
exaggerated  importance  attached  to  the  Malthu- 
sian  theory,  viz :  That  the  natural  increase  of 
population  constantly  presses  on  the  means  of 
subsistence. 

The  great  improvement  in  the  condition  of 


WAGES  99 

the  laboring  classes  in  England  immediately  after 
the  occurrence  of  the  Black  Death,  in  the  mid- 
dle of  the  14th  century  was  manifestly  due  to 
the  sudden  and  extensive  thinning  of  the  ranks 
of  labor. 

If  we  regard  labor  as  a  commodity  and  wages 
as  the  price  paid  for  it,  then  we  may  say  that 
the  price  will  be  so  adjusted  that  the  quantity 
demanded  will  be  made  equal  to  the  quantity 
offered  at  that  price — the  agency  through  which 
the  equation  is  reached  being  competion.  This 
harmonizes  with  the  law  of  supply  and  demand. 

But  this  "wages-fund"  theory  is  not  infallible, 
and  Mill  says  it  is  a  popular  delusion  that  high 
prices  make  high  wages. 

Ireland,  after  the  potato  famine,  affords  an 
instance  of  a  rapidly  declining  population  with- 
out any  corresponding  rise  in  wages,  while  in 
new  countries  we  often  find  a  very  rapid  increase 
in  population  accompanied  by  an  increase  in 
wages. 

As  far  as  any  direct  regulation  of  wages  by 
law  is  concerned,  it  is  possible  only  within  nar- 
row limits.  The  government  might  institute 
certain  complex  scales  for  different  classes  of 
labor  and  make  them  compulsory.  But  any 
rate  which  the  state  of  trade  would  not  bear 
could  not  be  enforced ;  business  men  could  not 
be  compelled  to  work  at  a  loss  or  to  keep  their 
capital  employed  in  one  place  at  one  occupation 
when  it  might  be  more  advantageously  trans- 
ferred to  another  place  or  occupation.  Thus  the 
legal  rate  could  not  exceed  to  any  considerable 
extent  the  market  rate.  Nor  could  a  lower  rate 


100  PROGRESS 

in  general  be  enforced,  especially  since  laborers 
have  the  right  to  combine  and  possess  powerful 
organizations.  The  competition  of  capitalists  for 
labor  would  tend  to  raise  wages  above  the  legal 
rate,  and  evasion  would  be  extremely  easy. 

"Industrial  competition  is  the  principal  force 
in  the  regulating  the  rate  of  wages,"  says  one 
writer.  "Wages  are  forced  to  a  minimum  fixed 
by  what  is  called  the  'standard  of  comfort' — that 
is,  the  amount  of  necessaries  and  comforts 
which  habit  leads  the  working  classes  to  demand 
as  the  lowest  on  which  they  will  consent  to 
maintain  their  numbers,"  says  another  writer. 

Increase  in  the  quantity  of  work  caused  by 
the  invention  of  new  machinery  and  by  the 
division  of  labor  also  affect  the  rate  of  wages. 

The  division  of  labor  makes  it  possible  that 
the  different  agents  in  the  joint  product  should 
be  remunerated  at  different  rates;  whereas  if 
the  process  were  begun  and  completed  by  one 
man,  the  commonest  or  easiest  labor  bestowed 
by  him  would  have  to  be  paid  at  the  rate  of  the 
highest  and  best. 

The  division  of  labor  also  causes  an  increase  in 
the  dexterity  of  every  individual  workman,  and, 
also,  a  saving  of  time  which  is  lost  in  passing 
from  one  kind  of  work  to  another. 

So  we  see  that  wages  are  not  governed  by 
any  one  rule. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 
CONCLUSION 

There  is  no  better  motto    .    .    .    than  these  words  of  Bishop 
Wilson :  "To  make  reason  and  the  will  of  God  prevail." 

Matthew  Arnold. 

"The  whole  economy  of  every  nation  is  the 
result  of  a  long  evolution  in  which  there  has 
been  both  continuity  and  change,  and  of  which 
the  economical  side  is  only  a  particular  aspect. 
And  the  laws  of  which  it  is  the  result  must  be 
sought  in  history  and  the  general  laws  of  society 
and  social  evolution."— [T.  E.  Cliffe  Leslie." 

"The  economic  condition  of  society  at  this 
day  is  the  outcome  of  the  entire  movement 
which  has  evolved  the  political  constitution,  the 
structure  of  the  family,  the  forms  of  religion, 
the  learned  professions,  the  arts  and  sciences, 
the  state  of  agriculture,  manufactures,  and  com- 
merce."— Ibid. 

Back  of  all  economic  investigation  must  lie 
the  idea  that  wealth  is  for  the  maintenance  and 
evolution  of  society.  Nor  is  it  right  to  assume 
that  all  men  desire  wealth  and  dislike  exertion, 
nor  that  self-interest  is  always  the  dominant 
power.  The  laws  of  wealth  must  be  inferred 
from  the  facts  of  wealth,  not  from  supposition 
of  human  selfishness. 


102  PROGRESS 

The  field  of  human  endeavor  which  would  be 
of  the  greatest  benefit  to  society  as  well  as  to 
the  individual  would  seem  to  be  the  study  of 
how  society  has  and  is  working  out  its  own  con- 
servation and  evolution  through  the  supply  of  its 
material  wants;  what  organs  it  has  developed 
and  how  they  operate  (these  are  questions  of 
fact  and  capable  of  being  studied  through  obser- 
vation and  history) ;  and  also  how  best  to  over- 
come the  natural  obstacles  to  progress.  Much 
has  been  accomplished — the  lightning-rod  has 
rendered  lightning  harmless  —  but  there  are 
many  problems  yet  to  be  solved. 

"Freedom  is  for  society,  as  for  the  individual, 
the  necessary  condition  precedent  of  the  solu- 
tion of  practical  problems,  both  as  allowing 
natural  forces  to  develop  themselves  and  as  ex- 
hibiting their  spontaneous  tendencies ;  but  it  is 
not  in  itself  the  solution.  .  .  .  The  solution, 
indeed,  must  be  at  all  times  largely  a  MORAL  one ; 
it  is  the  SPIRITUAL  rather  than  the  temporal 
power  that  is  the  natural  agency  for  redressing 
or  mitigating  most  of  the  evils  associated  with 
industrial  life.  The  neglect  of  this  considera- 
tion, and  the  consequent  undue  exaltation  of 
state  action,  .  .  .  appears  to  us  the  principle 
danger  to  which  the  contemporary  German 
school  is  exposed." — Encyc.  Brit. 

Competition  causes  both  profit  and  wages  to 
tend  to  a  minimum;  capital  tends  to  waste TtseiJ 
(moth  and  rust  doth  corrupt  and  theives  bre^k 
through  and  steal);  land  left  uncultivated  soon 
changes  to  a  wilderness  and  thorns  and  weeds 


CONCLUSION  103 

grow  where  once  was  the  vine  and  fig  tree,  and 
when  cultivated  it  "runs  out"  and  tends  to  pro- 
duce less  as  the  years  go  by. 

Eternal  vigilance  is  not  only  the  price  of  lib- 
erty, but  it  is  the  price  of  progress,  yes,  even  of 
existence. 

We  started  to  write  this  book  with  the  inten- 
tion of  showing  that  human  progress  was  not 
to  be  achieved  by  partaking  of  any  fountain  of 
eternal  youth,  nor  by  adopting  any  one  economic 
cure-all  like  the  single  tax,  but  rather  was  de- 
pendent upon  a  great  variety  of  causes.  If  we 
have  succeeded  in  this  we  are  satisfied. 

We  were  at  first  of  the  opinion  that  the  Nat- 
ural Enemies  (Supra  Chapter  III)  were  the  chief 
enemies  of  progress,  but  the 


country  into  the  World  WariaslOTC^cKIs  to  the 
conclusion  that  war  —  a  man-made  evil  —  is  the 
greatest  enemy  of  progress. 

If  I  have  done  well,  and  as  is  fitting,  .  .  .  it  is  that  which 
I  desired;  but  if  slenderly  and  meanly,  it  is  that  which  I  could 
attain  unto.  II  Maccabees  xv,  38. 


THE  END. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


DEC    1    1 


10Jun52CP 
1952  d 
?tNov'55PW 
15 1955  OF 


REC'D  CD 

FEB  25  M58 

ion*89** 


LD  21-100m-9,'47(A5702sl6)476 


VC  26847 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


